It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
At least 72 hours before attempting to buy a gun, they would be required to meet with a licensed physician to discuss the risks of gun ownership.
After the three day waiting period, they would need to locate a licensed firearm dealer located at least 120 miles from their home, which is the average distance that women currently must travel to get an abortion.
Before the sale, the buyer would also be required to complete several educational requirements.
Newman’s bill stipulates that they must tour an emergency trauma center treating victims of gun violence, meet with at least two families affected by gun violence, and talk to two local faith leaders who have performed funerals for children who have been killed by guns.
Then, before walking out of the store with their gun, they would need to watch a 30-minute video in the presence of the firearm dealer that details fatal gun injuries and review information about alternatives to purchasing a firearm. [Source]
Missouri is also home to some disturbingly high gun crime rates. St. Louis and Kansas City each rank in the top 10 U.S. cities with the highest rates of gun violence, and a recent report showed that toddlers shot more people in Missouri than in any other state. [Source]
“It is apples and oranges,” said Munzlinger, who earlier this week proposed repealing a state ban on carrying concealed firearms onto college campuses. “There is no correlation between them.” www.rawstory.com...
"Make him walk through a gauntlet of people holding photos of loved ones who were shot to death, people who call him a murderer and beg him not to buy a gun," the quote reads. "It makes more sense to do this with young men and guns than with women and health care, right? I mean, no woman getting an abortion has killed a room full of people in seconds, right?” www.huffingtonpost.com...
The phrase "well-regulated" was in common use long before 1789, and remained so for a century thereafter. It referred to the property of something being in proper working order. Something that was well-regulated was calibrated correctly, functioning as expected. Establishing government oversight of the people's arms was not only not the intent in using the phrase in the 2nd amendment, it was precisely to render the government powerless to do so that the founders wrote it.
originally posted by: SlapMonkey
Hmmm...I generally agree with you, but on abortion, we seem to differ.
originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: ~Lucidity
Abortion isn't a constitutional right that "shall not be infringed," so comparing this to the hoops through which one may need to jump in order to get an abortion is pointless and inappropriate.
In Roe v. Wade,557 the Court established a right of personal privacy protected by the due process clause that includes the right of a woman to determine whether or not to bear a child. In doing so, the Court dramatically increased judicial oversight of legislation under the privacy line of cases, striking down aspects of abortion-related laws in practically all the States, the District of Columbia, and the territories. To reach this result, the Court first undertook a lengthy historical review of medical and legal views regarding abortion, finding that modern prohibitions on abortion were of relatively recent vintage and thus lacked the historical foundation which might have preserved them from constitutional review.558 Then, the Court established that the word "person" as used in the due process clause and in other provisions of the Constitution did not include the unborn, and therefore the unborn lacked federal constitutional protection.559 Finally, the Court summarily announced that the "Fourteenth Amendment's concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action" includes "a right of personal privacy, or a guarantee of certain areas or zones of privacy"560 and that "[t]his right of privacy . . . is broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy."561 law.justia.com...
originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
Of course you disagree with a true freedom agenda. It proves exactly what Metallicus said. Both sides want to restrict our rights - just on different issues.
On what basis do you make the claim that abortion isn't a right?
originally posted by: beansidhe
Woah there, abortion is a right! Our bodies, our right.
I would agree it's apples and oranges, but to for one minute to think that it's easier and more acceptable to buy a gun than to have an abortion is mediaeval.