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.
You are correct. I do absolutely nothing to stop drive-by shootings. Should I? Should I go to a neighborhood that has frequent drive-by shootings and hold up a sign saying "Drive-By Shootings Are Bad!"?
Are you concerned about being killed by a drive-by shooter, who targets the wrong house, in your neighborhood? If so, what are you doing about it? Have you talked to your city leaders about the ShotSpotter gunshot detection system? Are you concerned about legal gun owners who do not store their firearms properly? If so, what are you doing about that?
Please post pictures of the people who committed these crimes in Tulsa and OKC. We'll wait.
Bottom line. The ACTIONS, and ACTIVITIES of these criminals are ALREADY ILLEGAL. Enforce those laws and don't plea down the charges so these often MULTIPLE FELONS get out of jail soon, or never get jail time, and are back out on the street to commit more violent crime.
While many are watching VA in Georgia SB 281 attempts to demolish the 2A... better be watching these real threats to our freedom than the diversionary impeachment circus. I checked the Georgia forum and thus far nobody has posted on this..
Well, I don't live in VA or GA, so I don't really care.
That is for their citizenry to decide. Just as the Framers intended. States' rights, and all that.
Well, I don't live in VA or GA, so I don't really care.
That is for their citizenry to decide. Just as the Framers intended. States' rights, and all that.
The Second Amendment is not a STATE'S RIGHTS ISSUE. All the States signed off on the Constitution, which only guarantees a few specific rights, of which the 2A is one when they became States. You seem smart enough to already know this. The Second Amendment is positioned right behind Free Speech because of its inherent Importance to FREEDOM.
This is NOT for the citizenry of States to decide individually, State by State. This is a Natural Right guaranteed by the Constitution which supersedes all State law, and agreed to already by ALL of the States. There is already a mechanism in place for the STATES TO CHANGE THE CONSTITUTION. We've done it several times before. That is the direction States should take if they don't like the Second Amendment as written, or want to REPEAL IT.
The Second Amendment is not a STATE'S RIGHTS ISSUE. All the States signed off on the Constitution, which only guarantees a few specific rights, when they became States. You seem smart enough to already know this.
This is NOT for the citizenry of States to decide, State by State. This is a Natural Right guaranteed by the Constitution which supersedes all State law, and agreed to already by ALL of the States. There is already a mechanism in place for the STATES TO CHANGE THE CONSTITUTION. We've done it several times before. That is the direction States should take if they don't like the Second Amendment as written, or want to REPEAL IT.
No, this legislation is a States' rights issue, however.
It goes without saying that it cannot be in conflict with the Constitution. Or rather, I thought it would go without saying. Perhaps I was wrong.
So, as I said, this is a matter for the citizenry of VA or GA, depending on which legislation you're talking about. If it passes and people think it's unconstitutional, there are remedies for that, as well.
No, this legislation is a States' rights issue, however.
It goes without saying that it cannot be in conflict with the Constitution. Or rather, I thought it would go without saying. Perhaps I was wrong.
So, as I said, this is a matter for the citizenry of VA or GA, depending on which legislation you're talking about. If it passes and people think it's unconstitutional, there are remedies for that, as well.
Yes, it is unconstitutional, but many other State gun laws have been allowed to stand by corrupt courts. Let's see if the courts will do their SWORN DUTY on this one if it goes through. Counties are already assembling Militias. This will get UGLY if it proceeds. These laws are ILLEGAL and it is the duty of the law abiding citizen to disobey them.
No, this legislation is a States' rights issue, however.
It goes without saying that it cannot be in conflict with the Constitution. Or rather, I thought it would go without saying. Perhaps I was wrong.
So, as I said, this is a matter for the citizenry of VA or GA, depending on which legislation you're talking about. If it passes and people think it's unconstitutional, there are remedies for that, as well.
The gun grabbing left tends to learn real hard, if at all. They over reach like this, and then get spanked by the SC, which actually tends to further solidify our rights, not diminish them.
It happened fairly recently in 2008 and again in 2010.
The recent NY case may be DOA, but VA and now GA could certianly repeat this pattern.
Gun grabbing lefties are persistent for sure, but clearly not the bright.
Yes, it is unconstitutional, but many other State gun laws have been allowed to stand by corrupt courts. Let's see if the courts will do their SWORN DUTY on this one if it goes through. Counties are already assembling Militias. This will get UGLY if it proceeds. These laws are ILLEGAL and it is the duty of the law abiding citizen to disobey them.
They aren't illegal until a court rules them to be in violation of the Constitution. Sorry. That's reality.
Militias? LMAO. As a native Michigander, and former soldier, I have a pretty low opinion of "militias" in the modern day.
Nothing's going to happen. Feel free to stock up on ammo and MREs, though. It's good for the economy.
They aren't illegal until a court rules them to be in violation of the Constitution. Sorry. That's reality.
Militias? LMAO. As a native Michigander, and former soldier, I have a pretty low opinion of "militias" in the modern day.
Nothing's going to happen. Feel free to stock up on ammo and MREs, though. It's good for the economy.
I am not saying there will be shooting, but there is certainly CIVIL UNREST, and the politicians and Courts see that. It could get ugly very quickly. During the Revolutionary War, the British didn't think much of Militias either. Neither did the British and Russians in Afghanistan, or the U.S. facing the VC in Vietnam until they forced them out.
How would it look, politically, and from a Humanitarian perspective if State National Guards shot at otherwise law abiding citizens? Does Kent State ring a bell?
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.
