Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
- All semiautomatic weapons are legal. The acquisition of firearms and ammunition cannot be infringed upon for a non-felon citizen. Ammunition
designed to circumvent body armor would still be illegal.
So the legitimately owned full auto firearms suddenly become illegal? I'm not cool with that.
Good, point. I, being a New Yorker, simply assumed all fully automatic weapons illegal, and that there was no hope. Very well then.
Once time is served hasnt the debt been paid? If they are to be treated like criminals the rest of their lives we may as well just keep them in
prison.
Excellent point. Then can we modify the deal?
IF YOU ARE A FELON DUE TO ANY FIREARMS CHARGE
So my .308 or .30-06 that could blow through a low level vest is now illegal? What about arrows and knives? They go through vests with
ease.
Hmmm... all states seem to have different laws regarding this.
Perhaps the aforementioned compromise should legalize all nonexplosive ammunition and all automatic weapons, but treat all murders committed with a
firearm as a first degree, and therefore capital, offense.
In theory it sounds nice and rainbows and stuff to compromise but this, at least the firearms part, seems to be born out of ignorance. Not to
mention there's the whole "shall not be infringed" thing.
Why do you think I brought it here? To discuss. I know all of jack about guns except that I want a shotgun to protect my home from "invaders." (we
get those in New York suburbs, it comes from the living so close to an urban area). If you started a thread on pro-tools and music production I
wouldn't stomp all up in it yellin' bout ignorance.
And I think "shall not be infringed" is damn important. Right now we have strange ammo regulation that's being discussed and interestingly enough
I've seen no mainstream coverage. This could technically infringe firearm rights without technically banning anything. We always need to protect
ourselves from legal loopholes.
Here's an example, Don Imus had his right to free speech infringed upon by threat of a "boycott" and his employers caved in. He NEVER violated the
FCC. I think legally Imus should have been prevented from being taken off of the air due to boycott threats. The only legal way to get him off of
the air would be a contract violation. That would mean CBS and NBC (pretty sure he was on both) would have to wait to see if the boycotts affect
Imus's bottom line (which they wouldn't have) before a termination, because I'm pretty sure that there are clauses in radio contracts that allow
for termination due to poor performance.
As far as anything else goes I dont care. Put criminals to death, abort until the age of 10, marry 35 goats a cat and six dudes for all I care.
Just keep your hands off my guns. No compromise.
So in other words, as long as your guns aren't touched you'd be free to vote for the guy that seems to make the most sense, and not automatically
for the guy with the R next to his name. That's where I'm going with this...
I think.
I have some tennis to attend to, and later I'll be working on some music...
on my vacation.
Yuck