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.
IMHO, the people who instantly scream that liberals, Obama, the state, the Feds, or whoever are always one step away from taking everyone's guns away, will never admit to the fact that what their real agenda is, is removing any and all restrictions on any weapon and any attempt to place any restriction whatsoever is infringement.
IMHO, the people who instantly scream that gun owners, and the NRA has an Agenda to make all guns of any kind legal, and repeal all gun Laws, will never admit to the fact that what their real agenda is, removing any and all weapons under the guise of "Safety" and "Saving Lives"
What laws or regulations are we worried about that will be instituted that will deny law abiding citizens from owning guns?At the moment all i'm hearing is a move toward stricter background checks.
"A well regulated militia, necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed".
Chief Justice John Marshall wrote in McCulloch v Maryland, "the power to tax is the power to destroy". By excessively taxing ammunition and firearms with the aim to prevent people from buying them, you are destroying the purpose of the 2nd Amendment. Even if you only made ammunition prohibitively expensive, you are causing the militia to no longer be well regulated. A firearm without ammunition is no longer a firearm and is rendered useless. You have infringed on the right to keep and bear arms. That is unconstitutional.
McCulloch has nothing to do with the 2nd Amendment but I understand the point you are trying to make. I'm not advocating a tax on guns or ammo, I own guns, I'm just playing the devils advocate here and trying to demonstrate that 2A rights can be 'infringed upon' without the government trying to ban them outright. & I'm trying to make a point that I think it's naive for the OP to think that the word "infringe" makes the 2nd Amendment sacrosanct. There are so many ways that gun rights can be restricted or limited that it's not even funny, taxation is just one way but there are others.
What laws or regulations are we worried about that will be instituted that will deny law abiding citizens from owning guns?At the moment all i'm hearing is a move toward stricter background checks.
That's all that has been proposed and even Bill O'Reilly supports it:
"On his show, O'Reilly said that every person who buys a gun in the U.S. should be subject to a federal background check. "The FBI should background check anyone buying a firearm in America. That just makes sense," he said. "If you are paranoid and believe the government is stockpiling information so they can come to your house and take your guns, that's your problem." O'Reilly said that the government has an "obligation" to enhance public safety. But at the same time, he said the president, even in light of a series of mass shootings over the past few years, is exaggerating the gun violence problem. Fox's O'Reilly: Background checks for guns 'just make sense' | Washington Examiner
What laws or regulations are we worried about that will be instituted that will deny law abiding citizens from owning guns?At the moment all i'm hearing is a move toward stricter background checks.
well since we already have background checks, then the point is rather moot isnt it? how about the bill that would put people on the terror watch list and prevent them buying a firearm if they are on that list, and they wont know they are on the list, and have no recourse to get off the list if they are wrongfully put on the list due to "national security" concerns.
how about people like diane feinstein who has said many times that she would ban ALL guns if she could.
and lets start with the 1934 gun control act, shall we? that one didnt ban owning automatic weapons, but it did make it difficult to get such weapons, until you jump through a bunch of government hoops to get your class 3 FFL.and then there was the assault weapons ban of 1993(?) that many want reinstated, even though it did nothing to prevent gun crimes.
Ok, so where in the 2nd amendment does it say that you can't impose a tax on guns or ammo? The initial response I got from one poster was that they can't be taxed, but that's clearly wrong- both are subject to sales tax..so I'm really unclear as to why there couldn't be an additional tax...
Let's tax all our rights away. I'm probably ok as I made a few bucks along the way. You poor guys better not complain when it costs $500 to vote.
bentbow, i know we have had this discussion before, and the fact that you are wrong doesnt seem to matter to you. ANY amendment can be repealed. all that needs to happen is 2/3rd of each house of congress to vote for an amendment that says "the second amendment is hereby repealed", give some specifics, and then they need to get 3/4ths of the states to ratify such an amendment, and once done then the second amendment is thus repealed.
and the supreme court would uphold such an amendment to the constitution, just like it id the 18th amendment, just like it did the 17th amendment, and just like it did the 16th amendment.
that said, i seriously doubt that any movement to repeal the second amendment would get out of the starting blocks. i dont see either house of congress even considering such an amendment in the foreseeable future. in fact i think ANY congressman that even suggested such an amendment would likely be bounced from office by the voters in the very next election, with few exceptions.
The Supreme Court wouldn't have a choice but to uphold the amendment. The court cannot rule unconstitutional, that which has been duly added and is a part of the Constitution.
Originally Posted by 2sleepyOk, so where in the 2nd amendment does it say that you can't impose a tax on guns or ammo? The initial response I got from one poster was that they can't be taxed, but that's clearly wrong- both are subject to sales tax..so I'm really unclear as to why there couldn't be an additional tax...
Excessive taxes placed on the exercise of a constitutional right with the intent or even the effect of making it harder to exercise that right, especially when it disproportionately effects a specific demographic or class of people, like poor people, would be blatantly unconstitutional and any court worth it's salt would rule it as such.
There is case law supporting my argument here. Back in the Jim Crow era, certain states and localities put things like poll taxes and reading tests as requirements to vote. Those barriers were not racist on their face, but they were designed and had the effect of keeping black people and others from voting.
Guns and ammunition should be equally subject to the same taxes that all other property is. Anything more than that should be ruled unconstitutional.
well since we already have background checks, then the point is rather moot isnt it? how about the bill that would put people on the terror watch list and prevent them buying a firearm if they are on that list, and they wont know they are on the list, and have no recourse to get off the list if they are wrongfully put on the list due to "national security" concerns.
how about people like diane feinstein who has said many times that she would ban ALL guns if she could.
and lets start with the 1934 gun control act, shall we? that one didnt ban owning automatic weapons, but it did make it difficult to get such weapons, until you jump through a bunch of government hoops to get your class 3 FFL.and then there was the assault weapons ban of 1993(?) that many want reinstated, even though it did nothing to prevent gun crimes.
So you are of the opinion that nothing should be done to beef up gun security and just leave everything as it is. Personally i have nothing to fear from increased scrutiny on back ground checks, as for Feinstien wanting to ban all guns? how likely do you think that scenario is going to happen?. Also how likely is it you will be put on this terror watch list?
Stricter regulation is not going to eliminate gun violence but may lead to lessening it.
Last edited by jambo101; 01-08-2016 at 06:02 AM..
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.
