Hawaii Adopting NY/MD Level Infringement post Bruen

[eruby]

While he was a big anti, especially regarding handguns, he had a permit and a gun given to him by Elvis.

Sunuvabitch

Hopefully both are working at K-Mart in Ypsilanti

 

[Biggfoot44]

Updated and expanded FOPA .

 

[Harrys]

Just more BS

 

[lazarus]

Gun control will never end because SCOTUS won't define the 2A as it is worded. And as long as there are "conditions" attached to gun ownership the left will exploit those conditions. That's why there should be absolutely no limits on this or any other right.

I doubt it'll happen. Even on the right, less than a majority are willing to believe that there should be no restrictions at all, despite a common sense reading of 2A. Most are going to think violent criminal shouldn't own guns. Most are going to think there are going to be some kind of arms people shouldn't commonly own, like ballistic missiles and chemical/biological weapons, or own without any restrictions like tanks. Or carry guns into prisons or allow prisoners to have guns.

So long as there are SOME kind of restrictions, the left will find ways to push the boundaries.

 

[lazarus]

Updated and expanded FOPA .

Only going to work if someone is moving between states. Residents of that state, feds are going to have basically no jurisdiction on that.

 

[swinokur]

How so? (where ignorance is bliss, 'tis folly to be wise)

It appears my hypocrisy knows no bounds

Apparently you were not as sick as you let on

 

[Bob A]

Apparently you were not as sick as you let on

Eruby well understands that life is a terminal disease.

 

[HaveBlue]

I doubt it'll happen. Even on the right, less than a majority are willing to believe that there should be no restrictions at all, despite a common sense reading of 2A. Most are going to think violent criminal shouldn't own guns. Most are going to think there are going to be some kind of arms people shouldn't commonly own, like ballistic missiles and chemical/biological weapons, or own without any restrictions like tanks. Or carry guns into prisons or allow prisoners to have guns.

So long as there are SOME kind of restrictions, the left will find ways to push the boundaries.

If someone can't be trusted with a firearm, they should not be freely roaming the public square. The lack of a firearm does not make a dangerous person safe.

The rest are red herrings.

My mom recently got a battery powered chainsaw (for gardening) that would fit in a medium sized hand bag. It's concealable and costs less than any functional handgun I've ever seen. Should "violent criminals" be riding on busses or loitering in a grocery store with one of those?

 

[lazarus]

If someone can't be trusted with a firearm, they should not be freely roaming the public square. The lack of a firearm does not make a dangerous person safe.

The rest are red herrings.

My mom recently got a battery powered chainsaw (for gardening) that would fit in a medium sized hand bag. It's concealable and costs less than any functional handgun I've ever seen. Should "violent criminals" be riding on busses or loitering in a grocery store with one of those?

Good luck convincing probably 95% of Americans that people with prior violent criminal convictions should have access to firearms again (okay, maybe it is only 90%). Probably some of those are conservative SCOTUS justices (likely based on prior judicial opinions).

 

[HaveBlue]

Good luck convincing probably 95% of Americans that people with prior violent criminal convictions should have access to firearms again (okay, maybe it is only 90%). Probably some of those are conservative SCOTUS justices (likely based on prior judicial opinions).

Ha ha. Not what I said or even my point. But I’ll play, Let’s see how your statement sounds when you use a different felony.

Good luck trying to convince 95% of Americans that a 20 year old conviction for writing hot checks is grounds for depriving civil rights.

Sounds silly to me too.

 

[lazarus]

Ha ha. Not what I said or even my point. But I’ll play, Let’s see how your statement sounds when you use a different felony.

Good luck trying to convince 95% of Americans that a 20 year old conviction for writing hot checks is grounds for depriving civil rights.

Sounds silly to me too.

But again, half of Americans don’t consider 2A a right, despite being in the BoR.

A lot of the others didn’t have an issue with deprivation of civil rights for decades. Some states you still don’t have a right to vote if you’ve been convicted of any felony. And Florida and others effectively said, “ahhh,
FU, nope” when ballot initiatives passed to restore the right to vote to felons.

So yeah, I highly more than a tiny minority of Americans will ever believe the right to keep and bear arms should never have any restrictions at all, ever.

What about restricting the carry of firearms in prison? Court?

 

[Mark75H]

I am for deprivation of rights for felonies. I am against the excessive number of crimes defined as felonies. Murder and treason and a very few others. Outside of that the crimes should be misdemeanors that do not deprive rights.

 

[jc1240]

I am for deprivation of rights for felonies. I am against the excessive number of crimes defined as felonies. Murder and treason and a very few others. Outside of that the crimes should be misdemeanors that do not deprive rights.

This 1000x over.

 

[delaware_export]

Apparently heard today:

in this corner, Neil Katyal , .gov gun grabber extraordinaire
and challenging him is MDS @wolfwood Alan beck