Monday, March 16, 2015

No, they didn't give up on the ban,

they're just wanting to do it in a different way.

Looks like that law needs to be passed: "You cannot ban any bullet or ammunition." 
And then throw them in jail when they try anyway.

I've now got to try to catch of some of the things I couldn't do the last few days.  I'd rather not, but.


Dan said...

"the right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED".

If THAT isn't enough to restrain the criminals in power than more laws won't make a difference. What WILL make a difference is hanging those who willfully violate the Constitution. As long as they can hammer away at a right with NO CONSEQUENCES they have no reason to rein in their

When actions have personal painful consequences they are not engaged in lightly. When they can occur with impunity then those actions will not just occur but multiply.

In short gun grabbers try to grab guns because nothing negative happens to them.....they pay no price for their evil.

Sigivald said...

More aptly, Congress should repeal the law it passed that ... banned certain ammunition as notionally "armor piercing".

(And no, "shall not be infringed" does not magically do the thing you want.

What's an infringement?

Banning felons from possessing?

Or disarming prison inmates, who are both "people" and seem to have no right at all to keep and bear arms?

The Founders never seem to have thought those were "infringements", but that reminds us that "infringe" is so vague as to be merely flavor text.

It tells us nothing about whether or not any specific measure is "an infringement" or "perfectly reasonable and in tenor with the intent of the Founders and the Amendment itself".

Yelling "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" is not a useful argument - even when you do it at something that any reasonable person would call one.

Just like "CONGRESS SHALL PASS NO LAW!" doesn't help clarify whether a speech issue is "a violation of free speech" or "just like libel and fraud and incitement".)

Dan said...

Infringe is an easy term.....and any law that inhibits in any way my ability to acquire, possess, own and carry ANY weapon including ammunition is an infringement. Trying to parse such simple language is the sin that brought us to our present misery.

And no....the WORDS 'shall not infringe' in and of themselves do nothing. Thus the need to part politicians from the breath of life for their that is the only method they respect or that works since government is at it's core power and thus will only respect the use of power. He who brings the most power to the party is in charge...and he who is not willing to die for their beliefs will always be disadvantaged. That little tidbit is why ISIS are winning.

As for the 'infringement' that felons suffer? The founding fathers never discussed the issue. The practice of stripping civil rights from criminals was done by legislatures with the willing complicity of the courts...I would suspect the practice to be abhorrent to those who wrote the Constitution. If you can't be trusted to vote or own guns then you shouldn't be walking the streets....if you did your time and are out then ipso facto you can be trusted.