balackolama
Regular Member
imported post
where does it say in the original 2a that a former criminal can't have a gun?
where does it say in the original 2a that a former criminal can't have a gun?
where does it say in the original 2a that a former criminal can't have a gun?
It isn't the gun. Attempting to control the access to a gun has been proven to not work in the least.A convicted murderer having access to a gun arguably conflicts with my rights.
It isn't the gun, it is the control; control of guns, thoughts, freedom, money, opinion &c.One more time....It isn't the gun.
Well said!Thestatements in the four posts* above mine could all be used as lesson plans in Oppressive Government 101.
If the fed.state.gov can take "reasonable measures" to "restrict the rights" of citizens to keep and bear armsat their discretion (which we all agree that they already do), they can continually lower the requirements until their reasonable measures to restrict the rights of citizento keep and bear armsincludes everyone. Even you.
You can't buy a handgun because you got a speeding ticket. You can't purchase a rifle because you were suspended from high school for smoking. You can't buy ammunition because you bounced a check. All reasonable measure in somebody's mind.
No, if a person has committed a crime, served their sentence and are set free, then they are exactly that... Free. All of their rights should be restored. If they cannot be trusted to be truly free to exercise all of their rights, then they should remain incarcerated. The only gray area is when they're on parole. They're not truly free to do as they wish because they essentially have a contract restricting their movement and actions for a period of time.
Additionally, many (most?) people who are released from prison with a firearms disability end up living in not exactly the safest of places (at least temporarily)and need a firearm for true self defense worse than most of us. If they are free enough to be on the street, they need to be truly free.
The right to keep and bear arms belongs to all free US citizens. Taking reasonable measures to restrict rights sounds like something the Brady Bunch and the VPC want to do. Actually that sound exactly like what they want to do. Think about it.
* ETA: The four posts above DH.
Trust me Eric, you don't get a dishonorable discharge for being a homosexual. Yours is becoming a bullsh*t argument. What a total shock.that brings me back to the soldier that had a DD
what if it was because he was gay and came out of the closet?
not that i support or like homo sapiens
And this is connected to openly carrying a properly holstered sidearm.... exactly... how?that brings me back to the soldier that had a DD
what if it was because he was gay and came out of the closet?
not that i support or like homo sapiens
I keep hearing that argument, but what bothered me about it kept eluding me. It just now hit. That argument is a false choice.If you cant be trusted with the RKBA, then you shouldnt be out on the street.
Now this is funny. Considering the etymology of Homo sapiens, I would say Eric has never made a more accurate statement. Thanks for the chuckle.not that i support or like homo sapiens
Thanks for saying something. I so wanted to.balackolama wrote:Now this is funny. Considering the etymology of Homo sapiens, I would say Eric has never made a more accurate statement. Thanks for the chuckle.not that i support or like homo sapiens