If only there was something we could do...

firearms are not "WMD" -
Weapons of Mass Destruction are :
chemical,
bilgical,
radiological, and
nuclear.

( including bombs. )

firearms are not "WMD".


in 2022,
If it doesn't stop rifle fire, I don't consider it a 'barrier' door ; two inches of Oak would be more effective ( and probably more expensive.

is all of this just 'window dressing' (?) )


how many times are you going to tell us he shot out a cylinder lock at Newton (?)
( I have the count at Six. and I have only been spot-checking this thread for the past ten days...

we 've got it > Newton.


can Congress actually pass this thing (?)

is it going to make any difference ?


good luck. skiJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by heckacali

Regardless of what the federal government says, state legislatures are going to make up their own rules by choosing to implement or not implement whatever the federal's come up with.

Another great step towards further dividing our population along social differences by state line.

Guns, access to abortions, LGBTQ rights, cannabis, voting access, religion in public schools, etc will all be set by states.

Look to Florida, Texas, Idaho to set the bar on the right, and California to continue to support the left.

---

It's why we can't have nice things

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by heckacali

Regardless of what the federal government says, state legislatures are going to make up their own rules by choosing to implement or not implement whatever the federal's come up with.

Another great step towards further dividing our population along social differences by state line.

Guns, access to abortions, LGBTQ rights, cannabis, voting access, religion in public schools, etc will all be set by states.

---

This is a feature, not a bug, in the US Constitution. Tenth Amendment and all that…

https://www.survivalrealty.com/american-redoubt/

These guys are going to make a killing. Which is a bummer. I liked Idaho and the people back in the day. Times are a changin'....

it was a feature when most folks never moved more than 25 mile from their brith place, it's more of a flaw now that we would like to be a more mobile society.

The USA is designed as a federation of states with limited federal government. Good luck changing that to your liking. You’ll have as much luck as the guys trying to change the border of OR and ID

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TBS

This is a feature, not a bug, in the US Constitution. Tenth Amendment and all that…

---

They'll take your weedz away....

Quote:

---

The US had to overthrow the Brits in a violent, bloody war to make America. This is literally the basis for the second amendment.

---

FWIW, James Madison is quite clear that the First and Second Amendments were intended to prevent religious discrimination like the Protestant British gun restriction laws imposed on Catholics. There were always gun restriction laws in America. As originally understood the First and Second Amendments were not intended to make guns more permissible but instead to forbid discriminatory gun laws.

It was only much later, long after the American Revolution, when the public and especially people in the American South began seriously reframing Thomas Jefferson and other revolutionary quotes into the context of fighting a 'tyrannical' government. There are three eras in American Second Amendment legal precedents and unlike American popular culture, none of them include armed rebellion:

1. Antebellum era when gun laws were based on English law “castle doctrine” where people had the right to defend their homes as long as they did so in a "non-terrifying manner"
2. Reconstruction & Jim Crow era when former slave states like Tennessee and Arkansas passed strict gun restrictions based on skin color
3. Modern Heller era when the Second Amendment is understood to provide a constitutional right to self defense i.e. for personal protection

In spite of thousands of far-right think pieces, from a legal standpoint, the America Second Amendment has never been about armed insurrection.

I guess this new bill won’t stop The Canadien government from dumping AR-15’s in the USA. This puts the Fast and furious scheme to shame. I mean why hide it?

https://youtu.be/cjhP768bA50


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Blame Canada.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NW_SKIER

They'll take your weedz away....

---

Not in my state they won’t.

Although I won’t pass a federal background check to buy a firearm…

^just lie about it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skiJ

how many times are you going to tell us he shot out a cylinder lock at Newton (?)
( I have the count at Six. and I have only been spot-checking this thread for the past ten days...

we 've got it > Newton.


can Congress actually pass this thing (?)

is it going to make any difference ?

good luck. skiJ

---

I'm going to keep posting it until the entire world agrees there is no good way to protect schools or patrol cops or churches or grocery stores or malls or any of us from that kind of firepower.. so we need to eliminate it from the general public's hands.

I'm also going to keep reposting this until folks say the quiet part out loud.. That they're willing to put our school kids and everyone else under this level of risk in exchange for their ability to procure this level of firepower..

Quote:

---

Give everyone who isn't ALREADY a felon instant access to be ability to EASILY carry out total mayhem for roughly $1,000? What could possibly go wrong?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TBS

This is a feature, not a bug, in the US Constitution. Tenth Amendment and all that…

---

And the 2nd A the way it is SUPPOSED to be interpreted.. "well regulated militias being necessary for the security of the free State". State is capitalized because it represents the the state level entities, not some emotional individual state.. It puts forth the guarantee that each of the states can arm and protect themselves against federal aggression and over reach. It wasn't meant so Bubba could be his own fucking militia and be his own free state..

Felons are getting a raw deal. They did their time. Why shouldn’t they be allowed their 2nd amendment rights like every other gun lover

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mcski

Felons are getting a raw deal. They did their time. Why shouldn’t they be allowed their 2nd amendment rights like every other gun lover

---

Be careful what you ask for. I suspect parole boards would be less likely to set prisoners free and parole them if it means they will be able to legally own guns when they are out again..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mcski

Felons are getting a raw deal. They did their time. Why shouldn’t they be allowed their 2nd amendment rights like every other gun lover

---

They don’t even do their time. That’s part of the problem.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SumJongGuy

It puts forth the guarantee that each of the states can arm and protect themselves against federal aggression and over reach.

---

No it doesn't. From a legal standpoint, the America Second Amendment has never been about armed insurrection. The so called States' Rights Second Amendment argument is an artifact of Southern Civil War & Jim Crow propaganda.

The armed militia component of the Second Amendment at the time the Bill of Rights was written was understood as contemporary to today's National Guard due to the Framers' fear of a standing federal army. The idea was national defense would be provided collectively by state militias belonging to state governments. At the time, by long-established tradition going back to the Ancients Greeks, states did not arm citizen soldiers. Instead citizen soldiers were expected to arm themselves for the purpose of national defense.

If your interpretation were correct, then as a matter of constitutional law there could be no restrictions on the types of military equipment owned by private citizens. People could not only buy machine guns, but also any other types of weapons like fighter planes armed with missiles or live artillery or whatever else necessary to take on a federal army.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MultiVerse

No it doesn't. From a legal standpoint, the America Second Amendment has never been about armed insurrection. The so called States' Rights Second Amendment argument is an artifact of Southern Civil War & Jim Crow propaganda.

The armed militia component of the Second Amendment at the time the Bill of Rights was written was understood as contemporary to today's National Guard due to the Framers' fear of a standing federal army. The idea was national defense would be provided collectively by state militias belonging to state governments.

---

Yet further proof the 2A is an outdated and obsolete amendment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MultiVerse

No it doesn't. From a legal standpoint, the America Second Amendment has never been about armed insurrection. The so called States' Rights Second Amendment argument is an artifact of Southern Civil War & Jim Crow propaganda.

The armed militia component of the Second Amendment at the time the Bill of Rights was written was understood as contemporary to today's National Guard due to the Framers' fear of a standing federal army. The idea was national defense would be provided collectively by state militias belonging to state governments. At the time, by long-established tradition going back to the Ancients Greeks, states did not arm citizen soldiers. Instead citizen soldiers were expected to arm themselves for the purpose of national defense.

If your interpretation were correct, then as a matter of constitutional law there could be no restrictions on the types of military equipment owned by private citizens.

---

Attachment 418781

https://twitter.com/jbouie/status/15...MqS0IpRKZLjKAg

^ Right, modern Americans cannot imagine an era when the United States routinely got its ass kicked in skirmishes and wars close to home even though it once happened all the time. Revolutionary era elites not only feared a standing federal army, but they also consistently refused to pay for one. So every time the need for an army arose they would scramble to assemble one piecemeal. Then as a result of a lackluster officer corps , little artillery and few skilled artillerymen, or an ineffectual navy things would inevitably go south. Rinse-and-repeat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SumJongGuy

I'm going to keep posting it until the entire world agrees there is no good way to protect schools or patrol cops or churches or grocery stores or malls or any of us from that kind of firepower.. so we need to eliminate it from the general public's hands.

I'm also going to keep reposting this until folks say the quiet part out loud.. That they're willing to put our school kids and everyone else under this level of risk in exchange for their ability to procure this level of firepower..

---

congratulations, C.

your worldwide agreement will be the first. time. Ever.

less one - Because I'm out.


when we are going to excuse someone for propping a door Open - Because she closed it but the lock was disabled -

it just becomes a Murphy's law tragedy.

' ... the swat team was at the gym - so they rushed to the scene without equipment ... '


the senate has a bill -
Two bets.
it gets picked-apart, or so bloated with junk


this is the price we pay for living in a GUN society...


good luck. tj

school could be made safer - by September -
But it's not going to happen
Because we can't get past the ideal of schools of the twentieth century...
( unrestricted access, pretty windows, and 'Recess Outside'

though I have missed the schoolyard attack at Recess )

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MultiVerse

People could not only buy machine guns, but also any other types of weapons like fighter planes armed with missiles or live artillery or whatever else necessary to take on a federal army.

---

I mean, 60mm mortars would be kinda cool to use at the range.

postscript.

If you think the Second Amendment is going to protect the State(s) from the Federal government, you might want to review how that worked-out for The Confederate States of America.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skiJ

Because we can get past the ideal of schools of the twentieth century...
( unrestricted access, pretty windows, and 'Recess Outside'

though I have missed the schoolyard attack at Recess )

---

'Recess Outside' isn't supposed to ever be in air quotes. It isn't a whimsical notion. Daylight & air are fundamental to our physical and mental health & happiness, as is freedom to move our bodies. It allows kids to learn when they are inside.

these aren't quaint, dated notions to give up so that gun fetishists can keep gunning