A conservative case for an assault weapons ban

[ironhead1]

Originally Posted by Minister_of_Information

The militia should march on Washington. Under arms. Maybe then they'll understand.

Hmm. Interesting.
Lets see, somewhere around 20 million law abiding hard working Americans that happen to believe in self preservation and defense descending on DC.

I'm wondering if El presidente would Martyr them all on world wide tv or try and get them at the house by house level?

Also wondering how many military personnel would open fire on their own families and neighbors.

[gatorman_07732]

Originally Posted by chompalot

If you don't pay the fine, liens and ruined credit would follow.

You obviously haven't a clue what your talking about

[Minister_of_Information]

Originally Posted by ironhead1

Hmm. Interesting.
Lets see, somewhere around 20 million law abiding hard working Americans that happen to believe in self preservation and defense descending on DC.

I'm wondering if El presidente would Martyr them all on world wide tv or try and get them at the house by house level?

Also wondering how many military personnel would open fire on their own families and neighbors.

I'd bet nothing happens except a parade.

[chompalot]

Originally Posted by gatorman_07732

You obviously haven't a clue what your talking about

If they decide to turn their weapon in, the person's credit could be restored and their would be a reduction in the fine--of course it would be time contingent.

[gatorman_07732]

Originally Posted by chompalot

If they decide to turn their weapon in, the person's credit could be restored and their would be a reduction in the fine--of course it would be time contingent.

Will you answer the question of under what authority does this happen?

[Minister_of_Information]

Originally Posted by chompalot

If they decide to turn their weapon in, the person's credit could be restored and their would be a reduction in the fine--of course it would be time contingent.

Yeah. High probability of that happening.

[gator996]

Originally Posted by gatorman_07732

I hate to rattle your cage, because some numb nut writer calls the judge conservative doesn't make it so. There is something call the constitution which he obviously has issues with in calling for confiscation of firearms.

This was an Op-Ed....the numb nut writer is the judge.

I swear citation rules are useless here if people don't actually read the stuff they want to opine about.

[gatorman_07732]

Originally Posted by gator996

This was an Op-Ed....the numb nut writer is the judge.

I swear citation rules are useless here if people don't actually read the stuff they want to opine about.

Anybody can claim they are conservative, but it doesn't necessarily follow. You missed the point entirely and I read the line

[gator7_5]

LOL at cops coming to my house, or anyone's house and taking guns. Good luck. Just goes to show you the quality of most sitting judges. What an idiot.

[gator7_5]

No insults or f-bombs.

[wgbgator]

Originally Posted by Minister_of_Information

I'd be in favor of arming anyone that is a citizen at the age of majority, who is not a felon or mentally ill. I could care less about their politics, unless they are enemies of the US Constitution. And I would love to see them marching in the street.

Ok, but you'd be a minority. I think every gun control measure ever has been partly passed because politcally dangerous, bad or unsavory people had guns or were intent on getting them and using them.

[Minister_of_Information]

I'm content to be in the minority. A minority fought and won the Revolutionary War.

[gator996]

Originally Posted by gatorman_07732

Anybody can claim they are conservative, but it doesn't necessarily follow. You missed the point entirely and I read the line

So you're more than ready to claim he isn't a conservative...

Based on what?


Have you looked through his records, judgements, & opinions?

[Minister_of_Information]

Calling the judge conservative or liberal is irrelevant. The fact is his premise is just plain wrong: high capacity semiautomatic rifles serve a paramilitary purpose.

[gatorman_07732]

Originally Posted by gator996

So you're more than ready to claim he isn't a conservative...

Based on what?


Have you looked through his records, judgments, & opinions?

Based on his opining to confiscate guns. You're funny

[gator996]

MOI
Totally a side issue...I agree.

Just find it funny how the "conservative" label is thrown around.

The GOP has a "purity" problem

[gatorman_07732]

Originally Posted by gator996

MOI
Totally a side issue...

Just find it funny how the "conservative" label is thrown around.

The GOP has a "purity" problem

No that is your issue. The confiscation is not conservative pure and simple
It's tyrannical

[Minister_of_Information]

Originally Posted by gator996

MOI
Totally a side issue...

Just find it funny how the "conservative" label is thrown around.

The GOP has a "purity" problem

Not really a side issue. The judge's argument rests upon there being no civilian purpose for such arms. But civilians in this country are considered part of the ("people's") militia, a paramilitary force. And these weapons have a paramilitary purpose. Whether they are compatible with public safety is a matter that can be debated and potentially regulated, but the argument that they are ipso facto inappropriate for civilian possession is erroneous.

[gator996]

So this is the litmus test for if you're a "true" conservative?

[gatorman_07732]

All those in favor of an oppressive government say Yea