I knew this would be a fun discussion topic. It'd be even more fun in a Sunday BBQ or cocktail party situation.
Reading some of the posts, I see that
rampage841512 and I are fairly close to agreement...frightening as that might be (just kidding rampage!
)
Bruxley said:
11. Laws limiting AP pistol ammo and restricting tracer ammo.
-NO! Tracers are damn handy and BG w/ vest needs to be dealt w/ too.
I gotta disagree here. I think the
state governments could show a compelling
safety interest here. Limiting tracer ammo in states like CA, AZ, TX and other states where there is a high degree of fire hazard would seem to be in the best interests of everyone. Just take a look at some of the fires we had in CA this last summer. Combine dry weather, tinder dry brush and hot Santa Ana winds with some yahoo firing his belt-fed with tracers and several
thousand homes could go up in flames.
DMxx99 said:
12. Prohibit convicted felons possessing handguns or full-autos only.
Only violent felons otherwise the nonviolent felons should have all their rights restored once they served their time in jail or prison.
I dunno... a non-violent offender can be just as ugly. Some felon who swindles & cheats the elderly out of their homes and brutally uses the legal system to sieze their life's assets is just as vicious as a robber with a knife...perhaps more so when the elderly person loses faith in their legal rights.
cabin pressure said:
the federal government was never granted the authority
to stop or regulate the personal possession of ANY item of
property by an individual citizen.
I disagree, based on the constitution. What are you basing your viewpoint upon?
Article I
Section 8. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.
My reading says that Congress can make laws that prohibit you from buying ...explosives, drugs, automobiles...
at all or without a permit as long as Congress finds that it is for the "general welfare" of the U.S. and does not violate USC.
Just out of curiosity Cabin Pressure, why aren't the issue of radioactive materials, biological weapons, nerve agents, intercontinental ballistic missiles, or other weapons of MASS destruction mentioned in the Constitution?
Red herring argument
Telephones, telegraphs, e-mail and computer networks are not mentioned in the 1st & 4th amendment. That does not invalidate the idea of privacy in telephone conversations but it does permit restrictions against threatening emails or spreading network viruses.
On WMD's....
Cold Dead hands said:
Rich people don't like to spend their money as it is, and they aren't likely to buy an ICBM just for bragging rights
Read about the private armies backed by the ultra-rich robber-barons in the 1800's. They spent money liberally to get what they wanted and supplied their armies with WMDs of the day--cannons, gatlings and more. A
George Soros with a pair of nukes could hold the country hostage for some political change. (gads, what a frightening thought!) A wealthy investor in Japanese electronics could triple his wealth using a few EMP nukes at high altitude to wipe out millions of electronic devices.