Does Congress have absolutely no authority whatsoever to regulate firearms? I understand not "wanting" to be restricted, but Congress regularly does things I don't want and it's perfectly Constitutional.

Do you believe one needs to be of a certain age before purchasing firearms?

How about grenade launchers, should they be allowed too, how about nuclear missiles?

Can due process be bypassed with regard to a terror watch list, and if so, should the people on it be banned from purchasing weapons?

I'm curious what your thoughts are on these issues, and not necessarily taking a position at this point.

PowerStroker wrote:

---

Does Congress have absolutely no authority whatsoever to regulate firearms? I understand not "wanting" to be restricted, but Congress regularly does things I don't want and it's perfectly Constitutional.

Do you believe one needs to be of a certain age before purchasing firearms?

How about grenade launchers, should they be allowed too, how about nuclear missiles?

Can due process be bypassed with regard to a terror watch list, and if so, should the people on it be banned from purchasing weapons?

I'm curious what your thoughts are on these issues, and not necessarily taking a position at this point.

---

 

Nope...NONE...NADA

 

If you can afford a nuclear weapon and have a dealer go for it, but I think you are just being a moron with that nonsense...

 

if they are on a terror list, getting placed on that list follows due process...they are not allowed to just add anyone they deem a terrorist to a list...

 

getting listed as mentally impaired also goes through due process arguments are made before a judge and the judge makes a decision...

 

back ground checks will catch these, assuming the person that is going to commit a crime goes through a normal process to obtain a firearm...

 

problem is most criminals do not go to a retail supplier...and there is just not a way to legislate that effectively...

 

The 2nd amendment is VERY clear that the right shall not be infringed...

 

MY argument is the left wants to RESTRICT law abiding citizens under a false premise it will have ANY impact on those who will use weapons to commit mass shootings...

 

Civilians own fully automatic assault weapons...they are hard to obtain...(harder than they should be) that said I do not think extensive back ground checks to obtain an actual assault weapon is too much to ask...

 

but nothing being sold to civilian population today qualifies as an assault weapon...

 

the government can claim a responsibility for keeping weapons out of the wrong hands as long as the steps they take do not infringe the rights of law abiding citizens...

 

but if I can afford to buy a Sherman Tank I should be allowed to...

 

The 2nd amendment is not about hunting...

 

 

-- Edited by Nuffan on Tuesday 20th of August 2019 05:10:28 PM

On the age issue....

 

It would do no good really...at what age does a citizen get any other rights afforded under the constitution...

 

In most households a person under age would not buy a gun their parent may....for them....

 

I was given my first rifle at age 10...taught how to shoot it, clean it and be safe when using it...

 

So I see nothing in the constitution allow government to make that infringement even based on age without a constitutional amendment...

 

but it seems to be reaching for an excuse to allow government to take away a constitutional right...

 

 

History has a lot to say IMO...

Check this out yo !

www.counterpunch.org/2019/08/16/uncle-sam-was-born-lethal/