Constitutional measures that can be taken for gun control

page: 3
6
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 10 2013 @ 10:58 PM
link   
reply to post by xedocodex
 

All your measures would do is create a big black market for guns and ammo. It is kind of like saying you can possess marijuana but you cant grow it and sell it. What happens? It is grown elsewhere and imported here and sold on the streets (street corners anyway). Guns will be manufactured elsewhere and smuggled in and sold at relatively high prices (illegally of course but no "background checks" - wink, wink). Is that what you want? Prohibition of alcohol also enriched organized crime and spawned other illegal ventures as well (but then I guess if we didnt have Prohibition we would not have had the Kennedys).




posted on Jan, 10 2013 @ 11:00 PM
link   
Let us say you were a leader or a commander faced with this problem....Use you imagination for a second.
If it were me and maybe you the first thing we would ask for is a map with all the murders by any means in the U.S. for the last 10 years??.....It would only take a glance at the map to see places like Chicago, St. Louis, Detroit, among others cities have allot of stick pins indicating murder and mayhem.

Next how many of these murders are attributed to what...Drugs, Gangs, or just some loose idiot?

There is a trial in Chicago that has been on hold for over two years because the defendant (one of the leaders of the Sinaloa Cartel) says/swears he was a paid informer of the CIA?DEA USA. It has taken two years of legal wrangling by the lawyers on what is admissible during the trial. Nothing to hide?

My humble opinion if there were percentage points given; what would be something the TPTB really cares about....maybe the children who have been gunned down part of the pie % would be much smaller than what we have been lead to believe. Nothing surprises me anymore. Maybe past my bedtime.......



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 01:44 AM
link   
reply to post by xedocodex
 


There will be no firearms ban.... its unconstitutional



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 06:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by xedocodex
reply to post by Masterjaden
 



TOO bad these are NOT constitutional AT ALL!!!!!!

An infringement is exactly that. Anything that infringes on these rights. You cannot heavily tax firearms in a way that infringes on the ability for the common man to obtain them. You cannot tax AMMO in a way that would restrict the average man to obtain them.


so MASSIVE FAIL on your so called constitutional measures that can be taken...


And who says they aren't Constitutional? You?

To bad your say means nothing in our system. Guess what, if any of these were passed into law, they would be Constitutional until a time the SCOTUS would say otherwise. And all of you are saying they would be unconstitutional, but none of you are elaborating how.

The Infringment only applies to KEEPING and BEARING arms, not your ability to purchase a gun and/or ammo. Taxing guns/ammo isn't an infringement on KEEPING or BEARING arms, neither is banning the sale of ammo. You can make your own, you won't get aressted for it, no infringement at all.



Here is the voice of the oppressor like you may never see it in these talks.

"Letter of the law" rather than the spirit of the law. Bring in the tax man and regulators.....the kings own. Seize those powder stores. Turn the law into the instrument of the crown rather than the freedom of the people. Let them pillage while the thing works its way up to SCOTUS. Using the law, the congress, the courts as their own private indulgence.

Down Rex down.....
edit on 11-1-2013 by Logarock because: n



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 08:04 AM
link   
reply to post by CosmicCitizen
 

It is SIMPLE: Call their Bluff (threat); Either Amend/Repeal (good luck) the the Second Amendment OR issue an Executive Order that declares that we are No Longer "A FREE STATE" (where the "right to keep and bear arms...being necessary to the security (of same)." If the later is chosen then the Founders were obviously right....but it wont be so obvious will it? The destruction of individual sovereignty to the growing dynamic of the state and ultimately to a global government is slow and insidious. The irony is that the "useful idiots" will be eliminated when no longer useful and considered a threat themselves (according to the history of communist takeovers).



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 09:44 AM
link   
reply to post by xedocodex
 

1) If it were illegal to purchase firearms, how would the government do it? Or is it another case of "its ok for the government, just not ok for everyone else"? Who the f**k is the government? A bunch of clowns who work for the corporations, my alleged public servants telling me that I cant buy a gun???

2) Seems like theres too much infringing going on here:

..the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

3) Ammo is a gray area IMO, but reloading should be heavily encouraged. People should educate themselves now.

4) Gun buyback? With what money? The government borrows 40% of every dollar it spends. They are beyond broke.

edit on 11-1-2013 by gladtobehere because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 09:49 AM
link   
reply to post by ConspiraCity
 

It is called the "color of the law"...if you make a law that is unconstitutional and it is not successfully challenged or overturned then it will have the appearance of being legal. In fact, one could create an unconstitutional law say to ban and collect guns and then collect and destroy most before it could be overturned....and guess what? In the meantime that would start a civil war/rebellion/revolution that would necessitate the declaration of Martial Law and the Congress would have its hands tied for at least 6 months (assuming some "terrorist" did not blow up the Capital Bldg)....



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 10:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Logarock
 



What if they wanted to regulate the sale of paper and ink so the local couldnt print under the freedom of press?


It is already cost prohibitive for an individual to run their own newspaper...I guess you should be outraged



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 10:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by ganjoa
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Aw shucks Wrabbit - I kinda like the idea of #1 AS PRESENTED by the OP.
Then we could have fully automatic guns, anti-aircraft & anti-tank weapons, grenade launchers, artillery - all kinds of neat stuff that is currently NFA restricted - as long as you manufacture your own stuff.
Same goes for ammo - flechette 12GA shells, depleted uranium, incendiary ammo, steel cased AP rounds - the list of fun stuff is endless!!!

Seriously, the only proposal that would stand the constitutional challenge would be taxation and even then something like a tax $10 per round could never meet any kind of reasonable test IMO.
ganjoa


Not sure you understand how laws work. Just because one is passed doesn't mean others are abolished. It would still be illegal for you to own weapons that are already restricted.

There is no "reasonable test" for Constitutionality, it is either Constitutional or not.

I think $10 a round is just fine. People currently invest 10s of thousands of dollars into their cars, and those aren't even a beloved Constitutional right. So why isn't it reasonable to expect people to invest 10s of thousands of dollars into their firearms? If they love them so much and they are that important to be an American, shouldn't you be willing to at least spend as much as you do on your vehicle?



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by xedocodex
reply to post by Logarock
 



What if they wanted to regulate the sale of paper and ink so the local couldnt print under the freedom of press?


It is already cost prohibitive for an individual to run their own newspaper...I guess you should be outraged


Oh a wise guy.

Well lets talk handbills and flyers then if that will ease the pressure off the brain.

One could have several 1000s handbills printed for distribution in their local area. But if someone in government didnt like what was on the bills they would try to pass a tax on each on handed out.....or tax at a point anywhere along the line, or demand a permit. This is what you are suggesting.

We had a case like this around here a few years ago and a judge ruled in favor of the constitution.
edit on 11-1-2013 by Logarock because: n



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 02:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by xedocodex

Originally posted by ganjoa
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Aw shucks Wrabbit - I kinda like the idea of #1 AS PRESENTED by the OP.
Then we could have fully automatic guns, anti-aircraft & anti-tank weapons, grenade launchers, artillery - all kinds of neat stuff that is currently NFA restricted - as long as you manufacture your own stuff.
Same goes for ammo - flechette 12GA shells, depleted uranium, incendiary ammo, steel cased AP rounds - the list of fun stuff is endless!!!

Seriously, the only proposal that would stand the constitutional challenge would be taxation and even then something like a tax $10 per round could never meet any kind of reasonable test IMO.
ganjoa


Not sure you understand how laws work. Just because one is passed doesn't mean others are abolished. It would still be illegal for you to own weapons that are already restricted.

There is no "reasonable test" for Constitutionality, it is either Constitutional or not.

I think $10 a round is just fine. People currently invest 10s of thousands of dollars into their cars, and those aren't even a beloved Constitutional right. So why isn't it reasonable to expect people to invest 10s of thousands of dollars into their firearms? If they love them so much and they are that important to be an American, shouldn't you be willing to at least spend as much as you do on your vehicle?


Well based on this sophomorish analogy the tax on a car would then be more than the car was worth. Try again. By the way do you know anthing at all about tax law? There is a term for taxing at 10$ a round....its not legal. Are you sure you understand how the law really works?



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 02:38 PM
link   
reply to post by gladtobehere
 

Illegal for you (to buy) Not them (as it is for post sample machine guns).



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 02:44 PM
link   
reply to post by gladtobehere
 
4) Gun buyback? With what money? The government borrows 40% of every dollar it spends. They are beyond broke.

The same way the state of CA city of LA and others do they too are broke but have a buy back program any way how is that so if is funded by whom or of what agency ??? could have a 3 country buy up program , new for you 2012 semi autos used and non used your for the $$ for.. ok so it is idea put nothing past this Administration , that is Obama and friends.



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 04:58 PM
link   
reply to post by bl4ke360
 



Isn't the point of all this to reduce crimes and injuries? When people's home-made guns explode in their hands because they're not professional gunsmiths, what would the point be? All it would do is make them more dangerous. Other than the fact that all of your suggestions are unconstitutional, you clearly didn't think of the consequences of this.


The point is to reduce the number of gun in society and stop people from killing so many other people with guns.

If someone kills themselves trying to build their own gun, that is their own problem.



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 05:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Wolf321
 


It is so sad that you think you need your precious gun to be free and happy.

Sorry to ruin your romanticism, but you owning a gun isn't protecting your (or mine) freedom. Sorry to ruin it even more, but neither are the troops.



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by CosmicCitizen
reply to post by xedocodex
 

All your measures would do is create a big black market for guns and ammo. It is kind of like saying you can possess marijuana but you cant grow it and sell it. What happens? It is grown elsewhere and imported here and sold on the streets (street corners anyway). Guns will be manufactured elsewhere and smuggled in and sold at relatively high prices (illegally of course but no "background checks" - wink, wink). Is that what you want? Prohibition of alcohol also enriched organized crime and spawned other illegal ventures as well (but then I guess if we didnt have Prohibition we would not have had the Kennedys).


So you are saying people would rather buy guns illegally than legally?

Just because they are taxed high, doesn't mean people will resort to commiting a crime.

It really seems like this tax idea is really bugging some of you, I guess that means that it is a valid solution.



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 05:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by xedocodex
reply to post by Wolf321
 


It is so sad that you think you need your precious gun to be free and happy.

Sorry to ruin your romanticism, but you owning a gun isn't protecting your (or mine) freedom. Sorry to ruin it even more, but neither are the troops.


You do enjoy freedom of speech. And my condescending friend, for many that seek to protect the 2nd amendment....its not romanticism at all. Not at all. More like a gastly wrestling with the devil.



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by xedocodex

Originally posted by CosmicCitizen
reply to post by xedocodex
 

All your measures would do is create a big black market for guns and ammo. It is kind of like saying you can possess marijuana but you cant grow it and sell it. What happens? It is grown elsewhere and imported here and sold on the streets (street corners anyway). Guns will be manufactured elsewhere and smuggled in and sold at relatively high prices (illegally of course but no "background checks" - wink, wink). Is that what you want? Prohibition of alcohol also enriched organized crime and spawned other illegal ventures as well (but then I guess if we didnt have Prohibition we would not have had the Kennedys).


So you are saying people would rather buy guns illegally than legally?

Just because they are taxed high, doesn't mean people will resort to commiting a crime.

It really seems like this tax idea is really bugging some of you, I guess that means that it is a valid solution.


Well do you want to bug? Do you want to bug and tax? Anyway its clear to see that you want to tax ammo out of the range of most to buy and then the mission would be complete. Just suck the blood right out of those stupid constitution thumpers.



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 06:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Logarock

Originally posted by xedocodex

Originally posted by CosmicCitizen
reply to post by xedocodex
 

All your measures would do is create a big black market for guns and ammo. It is kind of like saying you can possess marijuana but you cant grow it and sell it. What happens? It is grown elsewhere and imported here and sold on the streets (street corners anyway). Guns will be manufactured elsewhere and smuggled in and sold at relatively high prices (illegally of course but no "background checks" - wink, wink). Is that what you want? Prohibition of alcohol also enriched organized crime and spawned other illegal ventures as well (but then I guess if we didnt have Prohibition we would not have had the Kennedys).


So you are saying people would rather buy guns illegally than legally?

Just because they are taxed high, doesn't mean people will resort to commiting a crime.

It really seems like this tax idea is really bugging some of you, I guess that means that it is a valid solution.


Well do you want to bug? Do you want to bug and tax? Anyway its clear to see that you want to tax ammo out of the range of most to buy and then the mission would be complete. Just suck the blood right out of those stupid constitution thumpers.


No. The OP wants to ensure that it is impossible for a single Mother, working two jobs to support her family, to afford protection. Because she can't afford to exercise her right to protect herself, as she rides the bus back from her second job, and then has to walk another 5 blocks to her home!
The criminals that still have their guns, because they circumvented all of the brilliant ideas of the OP's, will be all too happy, to take her tips, and her life, after he asserts his control over her, to his contentment.

Some people are so short of critical thought, it truly astounds me...



edit on 1/11/2013 by GoOfYFoOt because: dee-de-dee



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 10:22 AM
link   
reply to post by xedocodex
 


As the OP - YOU are the one who proposed that no limits be imposed on self-made arms or ammunition - as long as the sale is prohibited. Are you backtracking from your proposal?
Have you gotten a bit more educated by the replies to your thread and now understand the idiocy of most of your initial proposals?
Taxation seems to be the only viable option to achieve your goals - yet taxation may not be imposed beyond that which is reasonable. A a per-round tax on ammunition would easily fail as excessive and PROHIBITIVE - BTW it's the prohibitive aspect of taxation that makes it unlawful....

ganjoa





new topics
 
6
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join