PILOT SPIN
Spin Zone => Spin Zone => Topic started by: nddons on February 15, 2021, 09:51:02 AM
-
https://www.bing.com/amp/s/www.seattletimes.com%2fnation-world%2fnation%2fon-parkland-anniversary-biden-calls-for-tougher-gun-laws%2f%3famp%3d1
Edit: if you can’t see the original article, here’s another one:
https://nypost.com/2021/02/14/biden-calls-for-tougher-gun-laws-on-parkland-massacre-anniversary/
-
Nothing came up for me when I clicked on that link, but . . .
Biden keeps calling for "common sense gun laws".
Well, I agree with him. Here are a couple of starters:
1. Allow honest citizens to be allowed to defend themselves. Make safe gun handling courses widespread and free.
2. If anyone commits a crime with a gun, then that person forfeits their rights under 2A.
In other words, it is only common sense to take guns away from criminals instead of honest citizens.
-
2. If anyone commits a crime with a gun, then that person forfeits their rights under 2A.
In other words, it is only common sense to take guns away from criminals instead of honest citizens.
This is clearly racist!
-
2. If anyone commits a crime with a gun, then that person forfeits their rights under 2A.
Be sure to tell the criminals this. They don't seem to be caring about what the law is.
-
Nothing came up for me when I clicked on that link, but . . .
Biden keeps calling for "common sense gun laws".
Well, I agree with him. Here are a couple of starters:
1. Allow honest citizens to be allowed to defend themselves. Make safe gun handling courses widespread and free.
2. If anyone commits a crime with a gun, then that person forfeits their rights under 2A.
In other words, it is only common sense to take guns away from criminals instead of honest citizens.
Try this one:
https://nypost.com/2021/02/14/biden-calls-for-tougher-gun-laws-on-parkland-massacre-anniversary/
-
Incorrect headline.
It should read ".... calls for dumber gun laws"
or
"... calls for useless gun laws"
or...
-
Incorrect headline.
It should read ".... calls for dumber gun laws"
or
"... calls for useless gun laws"
or...
Calls for racist gun laws. Gun control hurts minorities the most. A guy in the hood needs to carry protection more than anyone. Yet he may only do so illegally in the Dem gun control cities and so he has to choose to either be defenseless against attack, or risk getting caught by police with a firearms violation. God help him if he has a joint on him too.
-
Nothing came up for me when I clicked on that link, but . . .
Biden keeps calling for "common sense gun laws".
Well, I agree with him. Here are a couple of starters:
1. Allow honest citizens to be allowed to defend themselves. Make safe gun handling courses widespread and free.
2. If anyone commits a crime with a gun, then that person forfeits their rights under 2A.
In other words, it is only common sense to take guns away from criminals instead of honest citizens.
Define "with" and "crime".
-
Define "with" and "crime".
I didn't intend to write a comprehensive legal document. Ask a thousand people and you will get a thousand answers.
How would YOU define those terms? Or do you think that even criminals have the right to carry? I guess you could read that into 2A.
But, a crime is the act of doing something that will intentionally hurt someone else, whether physically, emotionally or financially. If you employ a gun during that "crime" then you not only go to jail but you lose your rights to keep and bear arms.. (That is how you tell the bad guys it is a bad idea). If you are caught with a gun again, you go back to jail for a longer term. I suppose there could be some appeal process to get your rights back, but you would have to be proactive about that. It wouldn't be automatic.
On the other hand, as long as you obey all other laws, you are free to carry.
Other than that, there could be some restrictions. You wouldn't be able to carry a gun into a prison to visit an inmate. There could even be rules against carrying guns into government offices where the environment is just too tempting and target rich. (I'm only partly joking here).
People always say the problem with existing laws is they take guns away from honest citizens leaving only criminals with guns. This would fix that.
-
Define "with" and "crime".
How about substituting the word felony for crime as being much better defined. There is a legal definition for felony and it avoids some democrat from leveraging this to start disarming Republicans for "crimes" like speeding.
The "with" clause also then becomes irrelevant as all convicted felons already lose gun rights (I think - could be wrong).
-
How about substituting the word felony for crime as being much better defined. There is a legal definition for felony and it avoids some democrat from leveraging this to start disarming Republicans for "crimes" like speeding.
The "with" clause also then becomes irrelevant as all convicted felons already lose gun rights (I think - could be wrong).
IANAL - don't some crimes become felonies if the criminal was in possession of a gun during the commision of the crime (in possession meaning on their person)?
-
How about substituting the word felony for crime as being much better defined. There is a legal definition for felony and it avoids some democrat from leveraging this to start disarming Republicans for "crimes" like speeding.
Good. The actual wording of such a "common sense" law would take volumes to clarify, so I was being brief.
the "with" clause also then becomes irrelevant as all convicted felons already lose gun rights (I think - could be wrong).
IANAL - don't some crimes become felonies if the criminal was in possession of a gun during the commision of the crime (in possession meaning on their person)?
True again on both counts. But there are already approximately 22,000 gun laws on the books, almost all of which are unconstitutional. I was advocating passing a "common sense" law that replaces all of them, as per the Constitution.
Yeah, citizens have the right to keep and bear arms.
But there are VERY limited and defined circumstances where people forfeit that right. That needs to be clarified and I don't have the legal education to word it correctly.
My proposal was also an attempt to point out that what some people deem "common sense" may not be quite so common. (I think I plagiarized that from somewhere).