Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-09-2013, 08:03 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
12,287 posts, read 9,781,715 times
Reputation: 6509

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by CAVA1990 View Post
No need to be rude. I'm asking for legal understanding. I'm not arguing philosophy. I honestly haven't seen this question clearly answered in constitutitional precedent including Heller.
pknoop has already answered. Ammo is protect by the second like paper is protected by the first.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-09-2013, 08:06 PM
 
Location: Everywhere and Nowhere
14,129 posts, read 31,155,909 times
Reputation: 6920
Quote:
Originally Posted by shooting4life View Post
pknoop has already answered. Ammo is protect by the second like paper is protected by the first.
The government can regulate paper. It can also regulate the time, place, and manner of speech as it does with parade permits.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-09-2013, 08:10 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
12,287 posts, read 9,781,715 times
Reputation: 6509
Quote:
Originally Posted by CAVA1990 View Post
The government can regulate paper.
Could they regulate the quantity you could own? Or what you could write on it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-09-2013, 08:16 PM
 
79,907 posts, read 43,952,085 times
Reputation: 17189
Quote:
Originally Posted by CAVA1990 View Post
No need to be rude. I'm asking for legal understanding. I'm not arguing philosophy. I honestly haven't seen this question clearly answered in constitutitional precedent including Heller.
Bull. I posted what the court said. The court ruled that you can not pass a law stating that any gun in your house had to be inoperable. Any gun without ammunition is inoperable. You don't want a legal understanding.

Quote:
You could have an operable firearm with one or a few bullets, not unlimited quantities. You don't need that many to protect yourself at home. Could the govt. limit possession to a certain amount?
I suppose the court might rule that you can't have a warehouse full but it would be a law without teeth. A person can make their own.

If someone wants a closet full, there is nothing you can do about it.

The Constitution guarantee's the right of individuals to secure a free state. How much ammunition do you suppose that would take?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-09-2013, 08:20 PM
 
Location: mancos
7,786 posts, read 8,000,423 times
Reputation: 6650
Quote:
Originally Posted by CAVA1990 View Post
The government can regulate paper. It can also regulate the time, place, and manner of speech as it does with parade permits.
I have had over 40 parades in my home just this year alone,no permit required
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-09-2013, 08:21 PM
 
Location: in my imagination
13,562 posts, read 21,331,071 times
Reputation: 10052
CAVA just admit you are anti-gun and looking for any desperate angle you can to ban them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-09-2013, 08:25 PM
 
Location: Everywhere and Nowhere
14,129 posts, read 31,155,909 times
Reputation: 6920
Quote:
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
CAVA just admit you are anti-gun and looking for any desperate angle you can to ban them.
I'm not anti-gun. I actually own a couple and one of my kids was a competitive shooter. I'm trying to understand the limits of constitutional protection of the content and quantity of ammunition. I didn't ask about prohibition, just regulation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-09-2013, 09:03 PM
 
Location: in my imagination
13,562 posts, read 21,331,071 times
Reputation: 10052
Quote:
Originally Posted by CAVA1990 View Post
I'm not anti-gun. I actually own a couple and one of my kids was a competitive shooter. I'm trying to understand the limits of constitutional protection of the content and quantity of ammunition. I didn't ask about prohibition, just regulation.
Wouldn't get much practice in to be a competitive shooter if we followed your lead and limited ammo now would you?

Hunters generally fire a few shots to sight in the rifle then fire only a couple while hunting then don't use the gun again until next hunting season. Target matches generally have boxes of ammo shot in one match, or in practice. S maybe that's why buying 1000 rds at a time isn't that far fetched. After all is some crazy going to be able to carry 1000 rds anyway? No he won't

The gun ban people's angle on banning or limiting ammo is to limit people from shooting at all because they don't want people to shoot period, it is not about safety.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-09-2013, 09:11 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
12,287 posts, read 9,781,715 times
Reputation: 6509
Quote:
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
Wouldn't get much practice in to be a competitive shooter if we followed your lead and limited ammo now would you?

Hunters generally fire a few shots to sight in the rifle then fire only a couple while hunting then don't use the gun again until next hunting season. Target matches generally have boxes of ammo shot in one match, or in practice. S maybe that's why buying 1000 rds at a time isn't that far fetched. After all is some crazy going to be able to carry 1000 rds anyway? No he won't

The gun ban people's angle on banning or limiting ammo is to limit people from shooting at all because they don't want people to shoot period, it is not about safety.
Here is over 1k rounds of ammo, for those interested.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-09-2013, 09:27 PM
 
48,505 posts, read 96,589,733 times
Reputation: 18303
Quote:
Originally Posted by CAVA1990 View Post
I have a right to free speech but that doesn't mean I can libel, slander, defraud, incite to riot, or yell fire in a crowded theater. All rights have limits.
But there are specific laws aginst that just as their are gun ammo laws o books.Its legal with restrictions such as age.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top