|
![]() ![]() ![]() |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns |
![]() |
flamin lib
![]() |
Tue Jan-25-11 04:07 PM Original message |
A modest proposal re-post. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
slackmaster
![]() |
Tue Jan-25-11 04:10 PM Response to Original message |
1. That would probably be Constitutional, but proposing it would be politically stupid, and... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
flamin lib
![]() |
Tue Jan-25-11 04:20 PM Response to Reply #1 |
4. Thank you. It did pass in 1934, probably in response to the |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
slackmaster
![]() |
Tue Jan-25-11 04:22 PM Response to Reply #4 |
5. Someone in another thread referred to the NFA as a line in the sand, and I think that's accurate |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
flamin lib
![]() |
Tue Jan-25-11 04:33 PM Response to Reply #5 |
8. The proposal wasn't a serious one. It was meant to be a launch point |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Atypical Liberal
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 09:07 PM Response to Reply #8 |
39. No one claims that. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
damntexdem
![]() |
Tue Jan-25-11 04:32 PM Response to Reply #1 |
7. A wonderful idea. There, I finished your subject sentence for you. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OneTenthofOnePercent
![]() |
Tue Jan-25-11 06:22 PM Response to Reply #7 |
24. Ask yourself "why" it's political suicide... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
flamin lib
![]() |
Tue Jan-25-11 06:30 PM Response to Reply #24 |
25. Yeah, like they did in the '50s & '60s when a majority wanted |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OneTenthofOnePercent
![]() |
Tue Jan-25-11 07:10 PM Response to Reply #25 |
28. The courts dictated that even a majority cannot violate civil rights. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
shadowrider
![]() |
Tue Jan-25-11 06:50 PM Response to Reply #7 |
27. Political suicide. Ok, so the politicians do what's right, then |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
oneshooter
![]() |
Tue Jan-25-11 08:12 PM Response to Reply #7 |
30. So you would be willing to give up.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GreenStormCloud
![]() |
Tue Jan-25-11 04:18 PM Response to Original message |
2. It will never pass. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
X_Digger
![]() |
Tue Jan-25-11 04:19 PM Response to Original message |
3. If you don't have money, you don't deserve effective self defense! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
flamin lib
![]() |
Tue Jan-25-11 04:26 PM Response to Reply #3 |
6. Well, that's what the congress did in 1934. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
X_Digger
![]() |
Tue Jan-25-11 04:34 PM Response to Reply #6 |
9. Yes. Heller- "in common use, for traditionally lawful purposes" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
flamin lib
![]() |
Tue Jan-25-11 04:45 PM Response to Reply #9 |
10. If congress can regulate a specific subset of firearms can it not |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
X_Digger
![]() |
Tue Jan-25-11 04:48 PM Response to Reply #10 |
11. Precedent changes. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
flamin lib
![]() |
Tue Jan-25-11 05:11 PM Response to Reply #11 |
14. Thank you for the constructive criticism. Living with a legal professional for |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
X_Digger
![]() |
Tue Jan-25-11 05:19 PM Response to Reply #14 |
16. No, but it does set a high bar, if in dicta not in practice yet.. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OneTenthofOnePercent
![]() |
Tue Jan-25-11 06:18 PM Response to Reply #14 |
23. There are limations to the extent of which congress can regulate firearms. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nuclear Unicorn
![]() |
Tue Jan-25-11 04:48 PM Response to Original message |
12. So only rich people get to be armed? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
flamin lib
![]() |
Tue Jan-25-11 05:01 PM Response to Reply #12 |
13. No, only the rich could afford a full auto in 1934. They still had access |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nuclear Unicorn
![]() |
Tue Jan-25-11 05:16 PM Response to Reply #13 |
15. But if there is a $200/weapon/year tax that means only the richest can afford it |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
flamin lib
![]() |
Tue Jan-25-11 05:28 PM Response to Reply #15 |
17. I think you misunderstood the machine gun tax. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OneTenthofOnePercent
![]() |
Tue Jan-25-11 06:06 PM Response to Reply #13 |
22. Just because it was done in the past does not make it legal. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
spin
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 03:24 PM Response to Reply #12 |
35. Gun control means keeping "those people" from owning firearms. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OneTenthofOnePercent
![]() |
Tue Jan-25-11 05:56 PM Response to Original message |
18. Hicap mags are not serialized and are very widespread. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
beevul
![]() |
Tue Jan-25-11 05:56 PM Response to Original message |
19. Define "high capacity magazines", first of all. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
shadowrider
![]() |
Tue Jan-25-11 05:58 PM Response to Reply #19 |
20. Anything over 1 n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OneTenthofOnePercent
![]() |
Tue Jan-25-11 05:59 PM Response to Original message |
21. Also, what would be your justification of a $4000 excise tax? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
flamin lib
![]() |
Tue Jan-25-11 06:47 PM Response to Reply #21 |
26. It always comes down to this, doesn't it? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OneTenthofOnePercent
![]() |
Tue Jan-25-11 07:17 PM Response to Reply #26 |
29. So you think it's OK to place arbitray dollar amounts on actions to effect a ban in-actuality? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
PavePusher
![]() |
Tue Jan-25-11 08:35 PM Response to Original message |
31. The NFA tax is, in my view, clearly unConstitutional. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Remmah2
![]() |
Wed Jan-26-11 10:09 AM Response to Original message |
32. Bad proposal. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kudzu22
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 02:55 PM Response to Original message |
33. It would be challenged in the Supreme Court |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RSillsbee
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 03:20 PM Response to Reply #33 |
34. OK, so where's the downside? NT |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kudzu22
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 06:20 PM Response to Reply #34 |
36. Well, I inferred that the OP liked the NFA/Hughes as is |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RSillsbee
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 08:36 PM Response to Reply #36 |
37. AAAAHHHHHHH Now I get it. NT |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Atypical Liberal
![]() |
Thu Jan-27-11 09:04 PM Response to Original message |
38. How do you define a high-capacity magazine? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Sat Sep 07th 2024, 08:31 PM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns |
![]() |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC