- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: What gun restrictions would you tolerate?
Posted on 5/26/22 at 4:56 am to Eli Goldfinger
Posted on 5/26/22 at 4:56 am to Eli Goldfinger
The 2nd ammendement is not so we can hunt. Is to defend your home and freedom against an invasion or a tyrannical government. And is says right to bear arms (not just guns). No restrictions should be tolerated. An invading force is not going to show up at your front door with only shotguns and hunting rifles.
This post was edited on 5/26/22 at 5:00 am
0
Posted on 5/26/22 at 5:16 am to Eli Goldfinger
I would not tolerate any new gun restrictions.
Posted on 5/26/22 at 5:39 am to Eli Goldfinger
I want to reverse the ones we have now.
Posted on 5/26/22 at 6:02 am to Eli Goldfinger
I would tolerate not transferring a weapon until the FFL gets a "proceed" from NICS. As it stands now, a gun can be transferred after three days if there is "no resolution" on the 4473. Sometimes these "no resolution" transfers end up being a "deny" which means the local PD/SO must be notified to go retrieve the weapon.
I would also refuse to sell a weapon to this person or any other overtly mentally ill person:
I would also refuse to sell a weapon to this person or any other overtly mentally ill person:
Posted on 5/26/22 at 6:05 am to Eli Goldfinger
I'll consider new proposals when they figure out how to effectively enforce the rules, restrictions, and laws already in place.
They have to do that before they can say more restrictions are needed.
They have to do that before they can say more restrictions are needed.
Posted on 5/26/22 at 6:10 am to Eli Goldfinger
Restrictions on felons w guns. Hard time. Students, Family and collateral acquaintances need to report problematic kids to LE, and LE must come down hard.
Posted on 5/26/22 at 6:10 am to texridder
quote:
Do yourself a favor and read Scalia's opinion in Heller so you don't come on here looking the fool.
"does not limit the right to keep and bear arms to militia purposes, but rather limits the type of weapon to which the right applies to those used by the militia, i.e., those in common use for lawful purposes.
(2) Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited."
From Scalia's majority opinion.
How can one say someone "does not limit the right" then in the same sentence place limits on gun ownership? So I can own a gun but the govt gets to decide what kind of gun I can own? How does this not directly come into conflict with "shall not be infringed"?
Guess what, looks like he doesn't understand "shall not be infringed" either.
There's a reason they call those "opinions", so Scalia can get fricked with regards to his opinion on the 2nd as well. You may need an Ivy League blowhard to help you understand "shall not be infringed", but I do not.
This post was edited on 5/26/22 at 6:30 am
Posted on 5/26/22 at 6:11 am to KAGTASTIC
quote:
What are 18-20yos mature enough to do w/o parents consent?
Apparently, not mature enough to get student loans since we taxpayers are about to pay them off for them.
Posted on 5/26/22 at 6:19 am to KAGTASTIC
quote:
So 18 is no longer an adult for other things?
at the beginning of the 20th century 15 and 16 year olds were starting work, getting married, and starting families.
Today our culture had pushed off the age of adult responsibility in many but not all areas. Many now stay in college until early 20s and get to stay on their parents health insurance until age 26.
The age expectation to do adult things seems to keep getting moved down the line except when it comes to voting, deciding what gender you are and getting an abortion. Apparently those decisions can start at 5.
Posted on 5/26/22 at 6:21 am to RCDfan1950
quote:
Students, Family and collateral acquaintances need to report problematic kids to LE, and LE must come down hard.
Sounds like the STASI to me. Some people just can't fathom freedom. They just reject the idea of it, because they've been nothing but controlled their entire lives. It's sad really.
Posted on 5/26/22 at 6:23 am to Eli Goldfinger
Require a European style muffler (a suppressor) at all public shooting for long guns.
Posted on 5/26/22 at 6:24 am to TrueTiger
quote:
the beginning of the 20th century 15 and 16 year olds were starting work, getting married, and starting families.
Today our culture had pushed off the age of adult responsibility in many but not all areas. Many now stay in college until early 20s and get to stay on their parents health insurance until age 26.
My parents got married at 16 and the day I turned 18 my Dad called me into the bedroom, wished me a Happy birthday, then told me how much rent a week I was to start paying.
Posted on 5/26/22 at 6:28 am to TrueTiger
quote:
on their parents health insurance
Anybody on their parents insurance shouldn't be allowed to vote, IDGAF how old they are. This is solid proof one isn't an adult, nor can they be expected to understand the complexities of society enough to be trusted to vote.
If you can't prove residency, you shouldn't be able to vote. It sickens me to think that the vote of some homeless drug addict that doesn't know that drugs are bad nor what day it is, counts as much as my vote- a land owning, tax victim.
Posted on 5/26/22 at 6:34 am to Eli Goldfinger
quote:
While I generally side with AR owners, I can’t stand how they take over shooting ranges and make it a PITA for those of us who just want to shoot a few times to check our hunting rifle.
I bet you shoot a couple of times and hold the range up while you take 30 min to check and measure your shots, then bullshite with your buddies for a while. That's why I go early in the mornings while your kind are at Hardee's
Posted on 5/26/22 at 6:34 am to Gideon Swashbuckler
The only restriction that I will tolerate is restricting the government from creating any restrictions (and tossing those they have already created)
Posted on 5/26/22 at 6:36 am to Eli Goldfinger
quote:
I’m OK with requiring all gun transactions to go through an FFL holder
So you are ok with a national gun registry?
Posted on 5/26/22 at 6:39 am to Donnie 9 inch
quote:
None. Zero. Zilch.
You are already tolerating a whole bunch. You have to have a license from the federal government to have ANY nuclear device. You have to have a license from the government to have a gun, for that matter. Can you buy a grenade launcher? Legally?
Posted on 5/26/22 at 6:41 am to Eli Goldfinger
On top of the ones that exist currently?
None.
Zero.
Zilch
Nada
frick off prowlerman
None.
Zero.
Zilch
Nada
frick off prowlerman
This post was edited on 5/26/22 at 6:47 am
Posted on 5/26/22 at 6:41 am to Eli Goldfinger
quote:
but I’m OK with requiring all gun transactions to go through an FFL holder
You dont 5th Amendment well, do you?
Posted on 5/26/22 at 6:43 am to dakarx
quote:
The only restriction that I will tolerate is restricting the government from creating any restrictions (and tossing those they have already created
Alexander Hamilton covered this in Federalist No. 84.
"Here is a better recognition of popular rights than volumes of those aphorisms which make the principal figure in several of our State bills of rights, and which would sound much better in a treatise of ethics than in a constitution of government... I go further and affirm that bills of rights, in the sense and in the extent in which they are contended for, are not only unnecessary in the proposed constitution, but would even be dangerous. They would contain various exceptions to powers which are not granted; and on this very account, would afford a colorable pretext to claim more than were granted. For why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do? Why for instance, should it be said, that the liberty of the press shall not be restrained, when no power is given by which restrictions may be imposed? I will not contend that such a provision would confer a regulating power; but it is evident that it would furnish, to men disposed to usurp, a plausible pretense for claiming that power."
This applies easily to the 2nd too. Why say the govt can restrict what gun I can own, when there is no power given to do so?
Again, I don't need an Ivy Leaguer telling me what the Founders meant. They weren't fricking present when this nation was formed. Who the frick do they think they are thinking they can interpret for me what I can read in the Founders very words??
quote:
They would contain various exceptions to powers which are not granted;
quote:
I will not contend that such a provision would confer a regulating power; but it is evident that it would furnish, to men disposed to usurp, a plausible pretense for claiming that power.
Boy was he spot on.
This post was edited on 5/26/22 at 6:46 am
Page 3 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News