Is the current administration aware of this?
Someone should send them the book!
For a small shipping and handling fee,
I’ll throw in the BILL OF RIGHTS for free!
Operators are standing by!
Great video, very informative! Thank you!
Welcome to the community @Carolyn12! Glad you are here!
@Carolyn12 Welcome to our community, we are glad to have you.
Welcome Carolyn, all 12 of them…
Hello and welcome @Carolyn12
Great presentation. Covered a ton of ground.
I am interested in discussing gun control arguments and pending attempts to restrict 2A rights. I would also like to see a discussion of “accessories” such as magazines vs handguns.
Start it or search for a similar topic and revive it.
Perhaps I should have been more succinct.
Or we could ask a Ukrainian…
My “presentation” was for the layman!
Pretty sure handguns will win against magazines depending on the amount of magazines & caliber of handguns.
The legal definition of assault is saying something similar to I’m going to beat you senseless. If you mention using any item to perform the assault it has instantly become an assault weapon. Example there was a line from the movie Robin Hood Prince of Thieves where Prince John says I’m going to cut your heart out with a spoon… from a legal standpoint the spoon had just become an assault weapon. Classifying a specific rifle as an assault weapon or assault rifle without any indication of assault is highly misleading and illegal.
Sorta like classifying Biden as a commander or a president of a free country without any indication of leadership is highly misleading and treasonous!
I personally consider Biden to be the faux usurper in chief!
My sentiments exactly. Same goes for defensive weapons
In order to take in as a serious issue, one has to know and be aware the proper defintions and terms.
In the Assault Weapons definition, Ask any legislator to define the term. They can not because the terms history goes back to 1992-1993 in which the US congress adopted the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban. It did not provide a actual defiintion. It provided a list of specific firearms some by actual model or manufacturer (Bushmaster) or general type (AK)
The term has been bounced around since then and many states adopted the same language (i.e. NJ) Recent activity has increased the usage of the word Assault Weapons to explain active shooter situations and other gun relating issues. Yet their are those that can categorily state they know the definition. So they are strictly speaking from an uneducated position, as there is no such definition. Then a another state came up with the term Assault pistol. In this states defintions, it would have banned almost every type of hand gun since the creation of the US. It did not pass committee meetings.
So we need to speak to the actual language and stop spreading misinformation and false statement which perpetuate the false ascersions that is being spouted out as true facts.
The next real issue that we as americans (whether you gun advoate or gun banning ) is the US Supreme Court up coming case in United States v. Rahimi (Docket 22-915). This will be interesting to watch and can have very serious and potentially far reaching consequences . Essentially as I read it, can a convicted felony who has a history of weapons offenses be granted his 2nd ammend rights restored.
[quote=“Theodore37, post:17, topic:93150”]
Essentially as I read it, can a convicted felony who has a history of weapons offenses be granted his 2nd ammend rights restored.
[/quote] That’s an interesting question if you go strictly by the 2nd Amendment of the constitution he should be granted his rights. There have been penalties established that forbid felons from owning firearms, but there is also the constitutional law that states any laws that oppose the constitutional law are to be considered null and void. I would think that the Supreme Court would go with the Constitution. I am not sure how I would feel about felons regaining gun rights, I would be torn between upholding the constitution and distrustful of the felon.
Welcome to the community @Carolyn12
SCOTUS has said that the rights listed in the constitution aren’t absolute. You can’t incite a riot, can’t yell fire in a theater unless there truly is a fire. Walk into an airport and say: I have a bomb, when you don’t and see where that gets you.
For me if you’ve proven yourself untrustworthy of owning a firearm, you don’t have the right to own one.