That I can wholeheartedly agree with. On Jun 13, 2014 3:40 PM, "Judah McAuley" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Of course "saying you can't have it" is regulation. Saying that no one can > have it is prohibition. Rules on who may possess, what type of weapon may > be possessed, and when/where they may be taken are regulations, not > prohibition. > > That being said, I don't think that more regulation is necessarily the > answer. Gun violence is down nationally and that hasn't been generally due > to regulation of weapons but rather social changes around drug culture and > violence. The stupidity around guns that is increasing now (open carry, > school shootings, anti-government violence, excessive force by government > against civilians) probably needs similar cultural approaches in order to > affect change. > > Judah > > > On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 12:26 PM, LRS Scout <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Saying you can't have it isn't regulation, it's prohibition. > > On Jun 13, 2014 3:17 PM, "Eric Roberts" <[email protected] > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > And both also confirmed that the right is regulateable... > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: LRS Scout [mailto:[email protected]] > > > Sent: Friday, June 13, 2014 1:41 PM > > > To: cf-community > > > Subject: RE: Another good visualization about mass shootings > > > > > > > > > But the individual right, and reasoning for it remain, and the court > had > > > backed that up in both Heller and McDonald On Jun 13, 2014 2:28 PM, > "Eric > > > Roberts" <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > At the time...it was able bodied males...not everyone. The militia > > > > act of > > > > 1904 got rid of the militia system, so the militia that existed at > the > > > > time of the consittution's writing no longer exists. > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: LRS Scout [mailto:[email protected]] > > > > Sent: Friday, June 13, 2014 12:42 PM > > > > To: cf-community > > > > Subject: RE: Another good visualization about mass shootings > > > > > > > > > > > > It's in clauses, who is the militia, all of the people. > > > > > > > > Commas man. > > > > > > > > It is a recognized individual right, it is incorporated nationally > > > > both by the supremacy clause and the 14th amendment. > > > > > > > > If you think that's wrong the correct legal remedy is an amendment to > > > > the constitution. > > > > On Jun 13, 2014 11:48 AM, "Eric Roberts" > > > > <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Actually...no it wasn't. It was about keeping the militia armed. > > > > > We no longer have the militia system. (with exception) That was > > > > > replaced by > > > > the > > > > > national guard, which is armed by the government. Please read the > > > > Militia > > > > > Act of 1904. > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: LRS Scout [mailto:[email protected]] > > > > > Sent: Friday, June 13, 2014 8:50 AM > > > > > To: cf-community > > > > > Subject: Re: Another good visualization about mass shootings > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yup, do you know what their standard was? > > > > > > > > > > Anything that is used by a basic infantry company. Does it have > > > > > combat utility. > > > > > > > > > > Why? > > > > > > > > > > Because the right is about the common defense, the military style > > > > > rifle is the specific item most protected by this amendment. The > > > > > right is a right to kill in the face of tyranny. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 9:43 AM, Eric Roberts < > > > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tim, > > > > > > > > > > > > Even in your favorite SCOTUS decision, Heller, as well as in many > > > > > > other decisions on the subject, the SCOTUS has even said that the > > > > > > 2nd amendment is regulatateable. > > > > > > > > > > > > Eric > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: LRS Scout [mailto:[email protected]] > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2014 10:59 PM > > > > > > To: cf-community > > > > > > Subject: Re: Another good visualization about mass shootings > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I disagree. > > > > > > > > > > > > I think absolute, endowed by our creator, natural > > > > > > > > > > > > They describe the same thing. > > > > > > > > > > > > Birth right. > > > > > > > > > > > > But even then, like I said, amend the constitution. Do it right. > > > > > > Define the right better. > > > > > > > > > > > > Otherwise the first and forth and fifth through eighth and > > > > > > fourteenth mean nothing at all. > > > > > > > > > > > > We have an amendment process. > > > > > > On Jun 12, 2014 11:53 PM, "Judah McAuley" <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hey, Tim, quick reminder: Rights are not absolute. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > None of them. Not a single damn one, enumerated in the > > > > > > > Constitution or otherwise amongst the laws deemed Natural. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am a hard core supporter of the 4th Amendment. And the 1st. > > > > > > > We've got some agreement in those areas. Still, however, they > > > > > > > are not absolute. They exist within a context where rights and > > > > > > > responsibilities are, at times, opposed to one another. That is > > > > > > > a matter > > > > > > for law, government, and society. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your fetishization of the 2nd Amendment has pushed it beyond > > > > > > > reason, to a state where it is considered absolute. That is > > wrong. > > > > > > > It was never that way, in the minds of the Framers or any > > > > > > > reasonable leader since. You've lost site of what makes our > > > > > > > country great. Get some > > > > > > perspective, dude. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Judah > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 12:04 PM, LRS Scout < > [email protected]> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Totally screwing up the market in the process. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Applying pressure on banks to not service gun related > > businesses. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Look at what the ATF has been doing to Aires arms, who > > > > > > > > operates totally with in the law. In that specific case the > > > > > > > > ATF have no legal authority > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > do what they're doing, in effect they are the criminals. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:370958 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
