Obama Administration Shuts Down Oldest Gun Show in Central Texas (gasoline, suspect)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's not infringing upon that right to require a specific place or method to purchase a firearm. You can still have it.
Yes it does, $^%$. If a license is required, a license can be denied. If a certain place is the ONLY certified, legal place to purchase a firearm, what happens when that place is closed or shut down for whatever reason?
Now ask yourself this simple question ... if there is a right to keep and BEAR arms .. why is it that most states don't allow you to carry a firearm openly? Hmmm? Because there are too many people like you who don't understand the definition of "bear" and "infringe", that's why.
The other thing that never seems to make the debate is the fact that at the time of the writing of the constitution, it was customary for gentlemen to openly carry their firearms for everyone to see. It was the scoundrel and criminal who concealed such weapons. The right to bear arms was intended to openly carry said firearms .. it didn't say the right to keep and conceal. Laws that allow concealed carry, while prohibiting open carry is not only backwards, but would tend to increase the likelihood of the need to use the weapon rather than deter criminals who could easily see that a person possessed a weapon. This is just another example of twisted, backward thinking. Wouldn't it also be of benefit to the police if the law stated that it was legal to openly carry, allowing an officer to readily see a person possesses a weapon, while also identifying a person with a concealed weapon as a likely criminal?
Now consider this ... the government decides (as has been discussed several times) of requiring a Million Dollar insurance policy to be carried for anyone who wishes to own a gun? So that means if you can't afford the insurance, you can't own the gun, even if one was handed down to you by your father. That is infringement.
There has also been talk of applying a huge tax on Firearms, making it impossible for the majority of individuals to afford them. That is close to being an outright ban.
And other proposals to simply outlaw ammunition, since the double talking criminals in DC and their lawyers suggest that the 2nd amendment doesn't specifically grant the right to keep and bear ammunition? That would render a firearm useless for the purpose of owning it in the first place.
This little pesky part about not "infringing" is the answer and the argument against such dubious attempts by criminals to find a "loophole" in the 2nd amendment.
Infringing means ... limiting or restricting one's ability, to include where you can buy a gun ... who can buy a gun ... what type of gun ... where and when you can you can carry it ... and who has the authority or the means to deny that right.
This is real easy ... so by continuing to suggest you don't understand this means only one of two things about you .. and neither is very flattering.
I find it ironic that a private seller is supposed to identify an illegal, while the local PO doesn't do their job of enforcing immigration laws in the first place.
They can't.
Immigration laws are federal, not local. Local police can't do much about it.
Immigration laws are federal, not local. Local police can't do much about it.
Actually, they can enforce them. If they can't enforce federal immigration laws, why are they making an issue about federal gun laws? Or to be more accurate, about cooperating on enforcing the wishes of the BATFE, not the law.
Yes it does, $^%$. If a license is required, a license can be denied. If a certain place is the ONLY certified, legal place to purchase a firearm, what happens when that place is closed or shut down for whatever reason?
Now ask yourself this simple question ... if there is a right to keep and BEAR arms .. why is it that most states don't allow you to carry a firearm openly? Hmmm? Because there are too many people like you who don't understand the definition of "bear" and "infringe", that's why.
The other thing that never seems to make the debate is the fact that at the time of the writing of the constitution, it was customary for gentlemen to openly carry their firearms for everyone to see. It was the scoundrel and criminal who concealed such weapons. The right to bear arms was intended to openly carry said firearms .. it didn't say the right to keep and conceal. Laws that allow concealed carry, while prohibiting open carry is not only backwards, but would tend to increase the likelihood of the need to use the weapon rather than deter criminals who could easily see that a person possessed a weapon. This is just another example of twisted, backward thinking. Wouldn't it also be of benefit to the police if the law stated that it was legal to openly carry, allowing an officer to readily see a person possesses a weapon, while also identifying a person with a concealed weapon as a likely criminal?
Now consider this ... the government decides (as has been discussed several times) of requiring a Million Dollar insurance policy to be carried for anyone who wishes to own a gun? So that means if you can't afford the insurance, you can't own the gun, even if one was handed down to you by your father. That is infringement.
There has also been talk of applying a huge tax on Firearms, making it impossible for the majority of individuals to afford them. That is close to being an outright ban.
And other proposals to simply outlaw ammunition, since the double talking criminals in DC and their lawyers suggest that the 2nd amendment doesn't specifically grant the right to keep and bear ammunition? That would render a firearm useless for the purpose of owning it in the first place.
This little pesky part about not "infringing" is the answer and the argument against such dubious attempts by criminals to find a "loophole" in the 2nd amendment.
Infringing means ... limiting or restricting one's ability, to include where you can buy a gun ... who can buy a gun ... what type of gun ... where and when you can you can carry it ... and who has the authority or the means to deny that right.
This is real easy ... so by continuing to suggest you don't understand this means only one of two things about you .. and neither is very flattering.
For all this, you still can't make a valid point without sounding like a complete nutter.
Yes, all of those things "infringe" to some degree, but that's life. Even freedom of speech is abridged in some circumstances. Nothing is ever totally free. By your definition, anyone at any place at any time can own a gun.
I would love to see a requirement that anyone in possession of more than two guns be required to pay, say, a $10,000 a year per-gun tax that is paid into a fund for victims of gun violence, as well as making ammunition around $15 per round. No one said you have the right to the ammo.
Oh, and every time you compare something to the way it was when the Constitution was drafted, keep in mind.
When the Constitution was drafted, an expert with a gun could fire about 3 bullets per minute.
Actually, they can enforce them. If they can't enforce federal immigration laws, why are they making an issue about federal gun laws? Or to be more accurate, about cooperating on enforcing the wishes of the BATFE, not the law.
No, they can't. Look it up. Illegal immigration is a federal issue, not a state issue. The local police are quite handcuffed in the matter.
The ATF is the one that stepped in here. The police are just supporting a law enforcement agency.
It is the responsibility of the police and BATFE to enforce existing law and not to coerse people into abiding what they think the law "should be".
Question: If local police and BATFE feel illegal aliens are illegally purchasing firearms at gunshows why don't they set up a sting with the help of ICE? Why don't they make the appropriate arrests and deportations by actually enforcing current laws?
Answer: Because, it is much more politically correct to shut down a gun show than to enforce existing immigration and firearms laws.
No, they can't. Look it up. Illegal immigration is a federal issue, not a state issue. The local police are quite handcuffed in the matter.
The ATF is the one that stepped in here. The police are just supporting a law enforcement agency.
[SIZE=4]
Quote:
[SIZE=4]Confused About Authority [/SIZE]Though state and local police officers have the legal authority to enforce federal immigration laws (this is explored more fully in the following section), officers may not realize this. Some people have tried to create a perception of an arbitrary distinction between immigration and other federal laws, and local officers may be uncertain whether the law or the Constitution grants them authority regarding immigration offenses; however, police at the local level often make arrests for other federal offenses
It is the responsibility of the police and BATFE to enforce existing law and not to coerse people into abiding what they think the law "should be".
Question: If local police and BATFE feel illegal aliens are illegally purchasing firearms at gunshows why don't they set up a sting with the help of ICE? Why don't they make the appropriate arrests and deportations by actually enforcing current laws?
Answer: Because, it is much more politically correct to shut down a gun show than to enforce existing immigration and firearms laws.
C-D won't let me rep you again
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
C-D won't let me rep you again
