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.
I believe only guns are covered by the second amendment. I've never heard of a case concluding that ammo is included. The government has laws regulating all other things that can be introduced into the human body from air, to drugs and food. Why doesn't the U.S. just license the purchase and possession of ammunition with limited numbers of highly regulated dispensaries, for law enforcement and others with a permitted need for it? Wouldn't that solve this whole issue? Under amendment 2 I likely have a right to own and carry hypodermic needles but not the right to purchase lethal drugs to put in them.
I believe only guns are covered by the second amendment. I've never heard of a case concluding that ammo is included. The government has laws regulating all other things that can be introduced into the human body from air, to drugs and food. Why doesn't the U.S. just license the purchase and possession of ammunition with limited numbers of highly regulated dispensaries, for law enforcement and others with a permitted need for it? Wouldn't that solve this whole issue?
I believe only guns are covered by the second amendment. I've never heard of a case concluding that ammo is included. The government has laws regulating all other things that can be introduced into the human body from air, to drugs and food. Why doesn't the U.S. just license the purchase and possession of ammunition with limited numbers of highly regulated dispensaries, for law enforcement and others with a permitted need for it? Wouldn't that solve this whole issue? Under amendment 2 I likely have a right to own and carry hypodermic needles but not the right to purchase lethal drugs to put in them.
Quit obsessing over what other people own and purchase, you'll be a much happier person.
I believe only guns are covered by the second amendment. I've never heard of a case concluding that ammo is included.
It's this kind of loony "logic" the gun-grabbers are now resorting to, as a backdoor method of violating the 2nd amendment: Acting as though the people who ratified the 2nd somehow would have not considered ammunition ot be protected as guns were protected.
If this silly dodge goes down in flames as it deserves, they'll probably try to regulate triggers next, or firing pins, etc., and try to persuade us that the Framers would have been OK with regulating those things as though they would agree they weren't "guns" themselves.
The gun-grabbers are twisting themselves into hilarious pretzel shapes with their "honestly held opinions" like this. Do they expect anyone to actually believe them?
I believe only guns are covered by the second amendment. I've never heard of a case concluding that ammo is included. The government has laws regulating all other things that can be introduced into the human body from air, to drugs and food. Why doesn't the U.S. just license the purchase and possession of ammunition with limited numbers of highly regulated dispensaries, for law enforcement and others with a permitted need for it? Wouldn't that solve this whole issue? Under amendment 2 I likely have a right to own and carry hypodermic needles but not the right to purchase lethal drugs to put in them.
The courts have ruled that individuals have a right to protect themselves. One can not do that with a gun alone.
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.
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.