bynmdsue
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2007
- Messages
- 1,892
He alo leaves out the bit about the NRA arming and training African-Americans to defend themselves from the Klan, the Black Legion and other groups of nightriders.
NY Proposal to Screw Gun Owner's a Little Bit Further
- Thread starter Sabretooth
- Start date
He alo leaves out the bit about the NRA arming and training African-Americans to defend themselves from the Klan, the Black Legion and other groups of nightriders.
Travis
Misanthrope of the Mountains
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2007
- Messages
- 24,133
*Adds Olympic Arms to his list of evil entities that need to be destroyed*
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
And that supports my point. Thank you.
So if you're flat broke without two pennies to rub together you still get a gun?
Cool!
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
I suppose you're right, and maybe I should buy a gun. You've convinced me!
That's fine by me. I have absolutely nothing against gun ownership. I am a gun owner, myself. I'm also a father of two very young children, so the operable guns are kept at my parents' house.
But that is entirely beside the point.
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
The right to an attorney. Even if you're flat broke, without two pennies to rub together, you get an attorney.
Also, you cannot be FORCED to present testimony against yourself, no matter how much they pout and scream. Cannot be done.
So, there's two. Wanna try again?
Not even close. Humans can be denied both of those rights, even by the US, as we have seen. It was only through the balance of governmental powers, not any innate human right, that any attempt was made to correct the situation.
Would you like to try again?
eta: And just for the record, it took everything I had to resist a "Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!" joke (in which people were both denied attorneys and forced to present testimony against themselves, true or not).
Actually, I did think of one, as nihilistic and morbid as it sounds. Every human has the unalienable right to death. Others can force death upon you or deny you the ability to die at the time and place of your choosing, but no one can take away your right to cease living eventually. At least, not yet.
Last edited:
Polaris
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2006
- Messages
- 11,396
Couldn't agree more. And it isn't even about the stupidity of the law (which is dumber than a sack of hammers). Any legislature should apologize when it hurriedly rams a bill through without letting the public see it, regardless of the content. And then be given pink slips.
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
No.
But if you have a legal title 1 firearm in possession, absent a felony conviction or other behavior that would put you in the prohibited class of individuals, you cannot be deprived of that firearm without due process - a fact acknowledged by the "grandfather" clauses included in new proposed regulations.
In California, there has been a bill proposed to end grandfathering of firearms, with the only problem being that no such firearms actually exist under California law - a fact that deters the politician in question not at all.
Ahhhhhh so you have a right to the weapon, provided you can cover the cost of owning the weapon.
Unlike a defence attorney which is supplied free of charge by the state.
Though I suppose you could have a 'public gun', one that you could borrow to exercise your 2A right, but then you'd have to give it back.
And it would probably be a bit nasty, with chewing gum stuck to it.
AlBell
Philosopher
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2009
- Messages
- 6,360
Right after you build a high speed train to NY?
AlBell
Philosopher
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2009
- Messages
- 6,360
Pink ones anyway. Tabacco juice more likely otherwise.
That was priceless.
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2003
- Messages
- 59,856
So you agree with poll taxes, yes? After all, they were just there to cover the cost of holding elections.
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2003
- Messages
- 59,856
Olympic Arms is in Washington, as the name suggests.
Sabretooth
No Ordinary Rabbit
True...but nothing says you have to own a church to practice your religion. Freedom of religion is free.
Huh?
Rather more to the point, do you believe that guns should be provided free of charge by the government?
Sabretooth
No Ordinary Rabbit
Obamaguns?
Sabretooth
No Ordinary Rabbit
Absolutely not. But if you are able to afford a gun within your budget or get a gun as a gift, the 2A allows you to have it (provided you're not a criminal or lunatic).
Look at this proposal another way...say you are financially able to afford a $500 handgun and pay your "negligent insurance" premiums...but then, you lose your job. Now you can't afford those premiums. This proposal says you must then turn in your guns because you are now poor.
The 2A doesn't say "..right to bear arms, if you can afford the insurance premiums..."
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2012
- Messages
- 16,212
Please evidence that claim.
True, but maybe that handgun doesn't actually cost $500, it costs $500+insurance.
Maybe there should be a process whereby loss of job or other financial problem could mean you can notify the insurers that the gun is no longer being used and is stored until you can afford to re-activate the policy. After all, if you're that hard up you maybe shouldn't be spending money on ammunition either.
And if you're subsequently found to be using or have used the gun without the insurance policy in place..... well, there may be trouble ahead....
The reason why I think the insurance is a good idea is not because it will price responsible gun owners out of the market; the actual cost of the insurance will vary depending on the risk you face as a gun owner. Ultimately the insurance protects YOU but it also makes you more aware of the risks you run and hopefully makes the gun owner a very responsible gun owner. If you take risks, you'll pay high premiums, and if you don't then your premiums should go down.