I think the NFA is Unconstitutional - Page 6

Ruggles · 12-09-2012, 15:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ruble Noon

I might have to because statist's like you have destroyed freedom in this country.

May I suggest Somalia, I think their lawless ways might fit your desire for no government interference and guess what you can have your RPGs and FA AK47s as well

(Just saw I was the 2nd person to suggest this to you)

holesinpaper · 12-09-2012, 15:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by LawScholar

If you're not a fan of organized society, why not retire to the tropical anarchist's paradise of Somalia?

Nowhere else but on the Internet does not wanting every irresponsible moron at Wal-Mart to have a Minuteman silo and a Mark 19 make a person a statist.

Because before the NFA and GCA of 68 America was some sort of 3rd world version of a Thomas Hobbes wet dream?

All lawlessness and violence, brutish and nasty.

Bull Crap. You must be a lawyer.

Ruggles · 12-09-2012, 15:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by holesinpaper

Because before the NFA and GCA of 68 America was some sort of 3rd world version of a Thomas Hobbes wet dream?

All lawlessness and violence, brutish and nasty.

Bull Crap. You must be a lawyer.

So all fluff aside do any of you guys who think the 2nd A is all inclusive think your views will ever be realized legally?

holesinpaper · 12-09-2012, 16:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ruggles

So all fluff aside do any of you guys who think the 2nd A is all inclusive think your views will ever be realized legally?

Better Q:

Will the United States exist in 100 years.

Magic 8 ball says: outlook not good.

Ruggles · 12-09-2012, 16:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by holesinpaper

Better Q:

Will the United States exist in 100 years.

Magic 8 ball says: outlook not good.

Well

1. We will both be dead so a bet between us does not make alot of sense.

2. Why do you think it will not? It has done fairly well so far.

Ruble Noon · 12-09-2012, 16:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by LawScholar

If you're not a fan of organized society, why not retire to the tropical anarchist's paradise of Somalia?

Nowhere else but on the Internet does not wanting every irresponsible moron at Wal-Mart to have a Minuteman silo and a Mark 19 make a person a statist.

Thanks for pointing out how far America has devolved.

Ruble Noon · 12-09-2012, 16:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ruggles

So my rights have no limits? What about when they clash with your rights, that tends to happen in a country of 360,000,000 sometimes. What then, fight to the death and winner has their rights?

Rights are not absolute when they conflict with the rights of others, they can't be in a civilized society.

Where do we draw the line? That is where the founders put processes in place to determine that. From the legislative and judicial branches is where, thought the people who elect them.

How does sawing the barrel off of a shotgun without the permission of the state conflict with the rights of others?
How does having an RPG or a grenade conflict with the rights of others?

TactiCool · 12-09-2012, 16:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by ray9898

How about bombs? Cannons? RPG's?

They are "arms".

They are explosives. And there is no 'explosives control,' but instead those substances and devices are outright banned by Fed. law. Not exactly the same thing as a sbr, mg, or suppressor.

So, the NFA being repealed would not magically allow anyone and their momma to possess bombs, grenades, and rpg's.

IMO, it was a presumtuous, misinformed, and short-sighted opinion for Scalia to use.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/842

holesinpaper · 12-09-2012, 16:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ruggles

May I suggest Somalia, I think their lawless ways might fit your desire for no government interference and guess what you can have your RPGs and FA AK47s as well

(Just saw I was the 2nd person to suggest this to you)

Come on Ruggles.

Just skip to the standard gun banners argument.

"What, do you want NUCLEAR weapons in the hands of civilians?!?! Because we can 'regulate' nukes, we can 'regulate' semi-automatics and folding stocks."

Anti-gunner.

nmstew · 12-09-2012, 16:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ruggles

So all fluff aside do any of you guys who think the 2nd A is all inclusive think your views will ever be realized legally?

Yes.

The number of silencer companies has shot through the roof lately. Every time I got to an FFL that is also an SOT there is always at least someone paying for something and filling out the transfer paper work for a stamp (usually an SBR or SBS). With the increase in popularity, I think it is just a matter of time.

Kingarthurhk · 12-09-2012, 16:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by muscogee

I'm not sure about that. I've never seen a 30-06 at a theater and I go quite a bit. All I have seen are the silly, "Unlicensed possession blah blah blah" signs.

I have seen those. However, if you have a CCL, at least in this state, you cannot bring it to a sporting event or an amusement park. I think theaters fall into that descriptor as well. I have a CCL as well as well as the authorized firearms I use on duty. When I am off, I prefer to off, that is why I went out and got my own CCL.

Ruggles · 12-09-2012, 16:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ruble Noon

How does sawing the barrel off of a shotgun without the permission of the state conflict with the rights of others?
How does having an RPG or a grenade conflict with the rights of others?

As I said much earlier and often in this thread I am for some refinement of the NFA. I agree the barrel length of a shotgun is not a relevant issue for example.

But a RPG or a grenade are devices that I would deem too destructive to be on store shelves for you or I to buy like a box of ammo. IMO your/my right to own them do not outweigh societies right to be relatively secure from you/me using them in a crowed restaurant for example.

Kingarthurhk · 12-09-2012, 16:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by LawScholar

If you're not a fan of organized society, why not retire to the tropical anarchist's paradise of Somalia?

Nowhere else but on the Internet does not wanting every irresponsible moron at Wal-Mart to have a Minuteman silo and a Mark 19 make a person a statist.

Yeah, we want a society ran by arrogant attorneys that want to figure out how to deprive as many people out their guaranteed freedom's to make a living reinventing society as they see fit from their gated communities.

Join the rest of us in society, the water is warm.

Ruggles · 12-09-2012, 16:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kingarthurhk

I have seen those. However, if you have a CCL, at least in this state, you cannot bring it to a sporting event or an amusement park. I think theaters fall into that descriptor as well. I have a CCL as well as well as the authorized firearms I use on duty. When I am off, I prefer to off, that is why I went out and got my own CCL.

Movie theaters are not a "no carry" zone in Texas. Quick Google check:

http://www.khou.com/news/texas-news/...163241606.html

You are correct about the sporting event and amusement park being no carry zones.

kenpoprofessor · 12-09-2012, 16:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ruggles

As I said much earlier and often in this thread I am for some refinement of the NFA. I agree the barrel length of a shotgun is not a relevant issue for example.

But a RPG or a grenade are devices that I would deem too destructive to be on store shelves for you or I to buy like a box of ammo. IMO your/my right to own them do not outweigh societies right to be relatively secure from you/me using them in a crowed restaurant for example.

Then surely we can regulate who breeds in society as well, there isn't any thing in the Constitution that wouldn't prohibit us from curtailing your need to breed.

Have a great gun carryin' Kenpo day

Clyde

Ruggles · 12-09-2012, 16:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by nmstew

Yes.

The number of silencer companies has shot through the roof lately. Every time I got to an FFL that is also an SOT there is always at least someone paying for something and filling out the transfer paper work for a stamp (usually an SBR or SBS). With the increase in popularity, I think it is just a matter of time.

Oh no doubt, these types of things are becoming much more main stream than before. I do not think that we will see a acceptance of FA firearms losing any restrictions though. Barrel length is much more likely to be unrestricted IMO.

Ruggles · 12-09-2012, 16:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by holesinpaper

Come on Ruggles.

Just skip to the standard gun banners argument.

"What, do you want NUCLEAR weapons in the hands of civilians?!?! Because we can 'regulate' nukes, we can 'regulate' semi-automatics and folding stocks."

Anti-gunner.

I did not go there because I did not have too. It is good to see that you (like me) draw a line on what the 2nd A covers. Although our lines as to what is and is not covered may differ we both appear to have them

And stop the black and white labeling of people already it is immature and silly. Just because I support some regulations on firearms does not mean I am a "anti-gunner" whatever that is exactly....I like most adults can use reason to determine things and do not have to resort to simple yes or no for a answer.

Just saw where you posted the same kind of crap in a different thread "BS LEO selective anti-gun nuts." Stop looking for "anti-gunners" behind every rock.

Ruble Noon · 12-09-2012, 16:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ruggles

As I said much earlier and often in this thread I am for some refinement of the NFA. I agree the barrel length of a shotgun is not a relevant issue for example.

But a RPG or a grenade are devices that I would deem too destructive to be on store shelves for you or I to buy like a box of ammo. IMO your/my right to own them do not outweigh societies right to be relatively secure from you/me using them in a crowed restaurant for example.

Yet I can buy as much diesel or gasoline as I want. Should we regulate the purchase of gasoline or diesel down to five gallons? We do want you to be relatively secure from your fears after all.

Ruggles · 12-09-2012, 16:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by kenpoprofessor

Then surely we can regulate who breeds in society as well, there isn't any thing in the Constitution that wouldn't prohibit us from curtailing your need to breed.

Have a great gun carryin' Kenpo day

Clyde

You are like a blind drunk guy throwing darts.....all over the place. How did we go from the 2nd A to breeding?

Besides I already have 3 kids so too late

lunarspeak · 12-09-2012, 16:49

you guys keep chirping about freedom but its starting to seem like you guys are just so paranoid that you think you need a RPG to be safe..

you dont have to look at "the people of walmart" to have a argument about why we dont need these rules appealed you only have to look at the people of glocktalk.

you guys are always talking about shooting anyone that comes into your yards..overthrowing the goverment,battleing
the forces of evil (or what you percieve as evil) your the ones that the NFA laws protect us from.

kenpoprofessor · 12-09-2012, 16:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ruggles

I did not go there because I did not have too. It is good to see that you (like me) draw a line on what the 2nd A covers. Although our lines as to what is and is not covered may differ we both appear to have them

And stop the black and white labeling of people already it is immature and silly. Just because I support some regulations on firearms does not mean I am a "anti-gunner" whatever that is exactly....I like most adults can use reason to determine things and do not have to resort to simple yes or no for a answer.

Just saw where you posted the same kind of crap in a different thread "BS LEO selective anti-gun nuts." Stop looking for "anti-gunners" behind every rock.

But you are an anti gunner, and anti freedom, you just can't admit you're a statist. I'm far from being an anarchist, I believe there has to be structure and laws, but within the bounds of the Constitution and BOR. Many of the SCOTUS decisions have run contrary to the these documents, because there were/are people on the court like you.

Have a great gun carryin' Kenpo day

Clyde

kenpoprofessor · 12-09-2012, 16:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ruggles

You are like a blind drunk guy throwing darts.....all over the place. How did we go from the 2nd A to breeding?

Besides I already have 3 kids so too late

No, it's an identical argument, it's regulating a right that clearly says "shall not be infringed". There is no such matter concerning procreation, so, it can be regulated, under the commerce clause no less.

What a shame, I can only hope your children turn out to be better citzens than yourself.

Have a great gun carryin' Kenpo day

Clyde

hogfish · 12-09-2012, 16:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ruggles

You are like a blind drunk guy throwing darts.....all over the place. How did we go from the 2nd A to breeding?

Besides I already have 3 kids so too late

Never heard of the "slippery slope", huh?

Ruggles · 12-09-2012, 16:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ruble Noon

Yet I can buy as much diesel or gasoline as I want. Should we regulate the purchase of gasoline or diesel down to five gallons? We do want you to be relatively secure from your fears after all.

Buy away, nothing stopping you except local laws and regulations from storing what fuel you will.

But that has nothing to do with the matter at hand. Surplus RPGs, grenades, SAMs or surplus 500lbs bombs are not in the same category as your fuel example. Weak example of comparison and you know it. Again this is not a yes or no question, it is a question where there is a reasonable answer between the two.

Kingarthurhk · 12-09-2012, 16:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by lunarspeak

you guys keep chirping about freedom but its starting to seem like you guys are just so paranoid that you think you need a RPG to be safe..

I really don't think I need an RPG to be safe. However, I don't think it should be the government's place to to infringe on that right, as clearly stated in the 2A.

Quote:

you dont have to look at "the people of walmart" to have a argument about why we dont need these rules appealed you only have to look at the people of glocktalk.

It is not about having confidence in people with firearms. If it was an idiot test 50 percent of folks owning firearms would have to relinquish them. Then again, if it was an idiot test to breed we could shrink the populace by about 70 percent.

The right has nothing to do with ability. Frankly, ability has gone down hill because we are are more urban, do far less hunting, and typically aren't raised in a culture where firearms are viewed as what they are-tools. Media hype, ignorance, and fear have created an ineptitude and wusification when it comes to firearms.

Quote:

you guys are always talking about shooting anyone that comes into your yards..overthrowing the goverment,battleing

Wrong, I am talking about original intent, history, and what the 2A actually meant and means.

Quote:

the forces of evil (or what you percieve as evil) your the ones that the NFA laws protect us from.

Laws only protect society from the law abiding. The cirminal element has always had, and will always have these same said "scary weapons".