FirstFreedom
Moderator
To the O.P.
Man, I think you've been brainwashed to some extent, to accept terrible infringements on our RIGHT to keep and bear arms:
I agree with that; that the background check is a good thing; but with a rather large caveat: that it only checks for convicted felons and court-adjudicated insane. NOT this unconstitutional BS about domestic restraining orders. A simple R.O. like that cannot be a basis for infringing a fundamental right.
Well, yes and no. It's better than the old way, but why would we be LICENSED to exercise a RIGHT? You don't get licenses or permits to write letters to the editor, to exercise your right to free speech. The whole system is set up to condition the sheeple to the idea that the government grants the privilege and can take it away - which is flat wrong. The system is flawed.
Say what!?! Why the heck not? We already have a 100% increase in the number of states that allow vermont-style carry, than we did 5 years ago (two now, was one). The pendulum is swinging, and it's swinging our way. Two down, forty-eight to go!!! In 1987, there was ONE state with shall-issue CCW. Now there is something like 37!!!! It can and ought to be done just like alaska and vermont in all 50 states, or at least as many as we can get!
Say WHAT!!!!????!!!!! Most certainly all responsible citizens should be allowed to own fully automatic rifles. But under no circumstances is the current system acceptable. The only reason it costs $10,000 to buy a full auto instead of the $550 (plus the class 3 taxes) that it should, is because of Reagan's 1986 import ban!! Supply and demand drives up the prices so far that only the rich can have fully auto. How is something possibly a RIGHT when only the rich can exercise it? Idonthinso! The 86 ban must be repealed - it is probably the single largest infringement of our RIGHT to keep and bear arms. The license fee ought to be closer than $50 than $200 also. At some point a tax becomes a financial barrier, which is tantamount to an infringement.
YMMV.
Man, I think you've been brainwashed to some extent, to accept terrible infringements on our RIGHT to keep and bear arms:
I agree with that; that the background check is a good thing; but with a rather large caveat: that it only checks for convicted felons and court-adjudicated insane. NOT this unconstitutional BS about domestic restraining orders. A simple R.O. like that cannot be a basis for infringing a fundamental right.
Well, yes and no. It's better than the old way, but why would we be LICENSED to exercise a RIGHT? You don't get licenses or permits to write letters to the editor, to exercise your right to free speech. The whole system is set up to condition the sheeple to the idea that the government grants the privilege and can take it away - which is flat wrong. The system is flawed.
Say what!?! Why the heck not? We already have a 100% increase in the number of states that allow vermont-style carry, than we did 5 years ago (two now, was one). The pendulum is swinging, and it's swinging our way. Two down, forty-eight to go!!! In 1987, there was ONE state with shall-issue CCW. Now there is something like 37!!!! It can and ought to be done just like alaska and vermont in all 50 states, or at least as many as we can get!
Say WHAT!!!!????!!!!! Most certainly all responsible citizens should be allowed to own fully automatic rifles. But under no circumstances is the current system acceptable. The only reason it costs $10,000 to buy a full auto instead of the $550 (plus the class 3 taxes) that it should, is because of Reagan's 1986 import ban!! Supply and demand drives up the prices so far that only the rich can have fully auto. How is something possibly a RIGHT when only the rich can exercise it? Idonthinso! The 86 ban must be repealed - it is probably the single largest infringement of our RIGHT to keep and bear arms. The license fee ought to be closer than $50 than $200 also. At some point a tax becomes a financial barrier, which is tantamount to an infringement.
YMMV.