General Categories > Laws and Legislation
What do you think is Constitutional?
Mntnman:
I wish that I had crossed paths with Gunscribe earlier in life. He really has things nailed down.
DenmanShooter:
None. Period. Nada. Zilch. Zero.
"Shall not be infringed." Means shall not be infringed. Any and all restrictions are infringement. It is pretty plain, simple and straight forward English.
Gary:
--- Quote from: Mudinyeri on July 09, 2014, 10:36:51 AM ---SHALL. NOT. BE. INFRINGED. I see nothing ambiguous in that statement.
--- End quote ---
We had prisons in the colonial times, and I doubt the 2nd A was penned for those folks.
I have no problem with a lawless segmant of society getting locked up, and staying locked up.
But what do we do in Nebraska? We not only make them more crazy in jail as is the case of Ninko, we then turn him loose when he asks to be helped. How many people did he kill? We know of 4. There are more murders in that time period he may be guilty of, but his stragegty is to use that to bargan with later?
Not only do we not know how to handle our own undesirable factions in our population, we now bus children from central america and mexico to live in Nebraska. Those kids and adults need to be put on planes headed south ASAP NOW.
I think if you sit down to play gin, it would be pretty foolish to start playing 21 in the middle of a hand.
In the 1830s if someone served his time, and was given full rights back, that was the rules then.
In 2014, if someone if a felon out of jail, I dont want this guy buying guns in walmart. It is the law of the land today, and if his parents and teachers were on the ball, every child knows the difference between right and wrong. They knew better, and they knew the consequences, or should have known.
Mntnman:
What does a law making it illegal for felons to buy guns at Wal Mart do? Does it keep them from getting a gun if they want one? I would say almost never. What it really does is provide a crack in the foundation of our protection. That crack gets worked and worked until we are left with nothing.
The 2A is 27 words of liberty. It is still the law of the land but too many folks have been fooled into not believing it. If we don't stand together and support the full gravity of it because we find some parts scary, we are handing the antis the hammers and chisels.
Gunscribe:
Gary, you don't know how much I agree with you in principal. Lock them up and keep them locked up.
This is a very emotional issue and it is easy to make a law that says ______ can not possess firearms.
But what does that truly accomplish? Those felons that do their time and lawfully get on with their lives without a firearm are not the problem.
The problem is those felons that return to a life of crime possessing and using firearms. The law means nothing to them. Breaking the law is in their job description.
The only people that obey gun laws are those law abiding citizens that are disinclined from criminal activity and that includes felons that have put their past behind them.
Gun laws only effect and make life more dangerous for the law abiding.
In states that have registration a felon can not be charged with failing to register a firearm because it they tried to they would be incriminating themselves. What good does registration do if only lawful citizen can be charged with failure to?
True, there are members of society that have no business being around firearms and we all know some that have never been in trouble a day in their life.
I appreciate your example of Nikko, but I think it may not be the right one for this situation.
As I understand the case he was sentenced to 21 yrs. of that he did 10 yrs. in incarceration. That means he still has an 11 yr. parole obligation to the state, so even if he had kept his nose clean it would still be nearly a dozen years before he could be considered a free man having fully paid his debt to society.
The fact that he had a gun means the law forbidding felons from possessing a firearm did not accomplish one damn thing anyway. Why have useless laws on the books?
I understand it provides an opportunity to prosecute a felon when caught, but how many more companion charges have they already broken that should be enough to put that person away for a very long time? Rape? Bank robbery? Car Jacking?
True most of these people do not get the sentences that they deserve, but that is a function of the courts. Passing more laws to take up the slack in the courts is the lazy feel good way out.
Why should society be subjected to laws that are enacted because panty-waist judges refuse to do their jobs.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version