New York state has always been an outlier in these social issues. It's also the state you gotta remember, that allows abortion up to full term. I understand why the state has to act this way because of NYC.
Current Affairs The " another shooting in America " thread
- Status
New York state has always been an outlier in these social issues. It's also the state you gotta remember, that allows abortion up to full term. I understand why the state has to act this way because of NYC.
After Parkland school shooting Florida introduced a waiting time of 3 days and raised the age to purchase weapons to 21 and introduced red flag laws.
Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Act & Related School Saf
Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Act & Related School Safety Legislation
www.fldoe.org
They did not do that because of their state abortion laws or because of NYC - they did it because even Florida Republicans realized at least some of the dangers of easy access to guns by angry young men.
I don't see why not. If the interpretation of the Second Amendment is that citizens like me should have the capability to defend themselves against the military power of the United States - why should I not be able to acquire an MQ-9 Reaper, an M1 Abrams tank, and/or an F-35 with any or all fully equipped with munitions?
Former Speaker of the House and Vice President of the United States.
Curious, earlier you said about the possibility of citizens needing be able to fight off a tyrannical government, but now they don’t need land mines and AA guns?
Just for clarification, I can own an RPG (which simply refers to a tube) but if that sucker is loaded with an actual explosive device it is illegal for me to possess in the State of Texas.
Lol the 2nd amendment isn't about having the best weaponry or having the best vehicles. The 2nd amendment guarantees manpower and logically thinking, a state ran military of 500k is always going to suffer defeat against 300 million citizens who are all armed to the teeth with assault rifles. That's the idea our founding fathers had.
A. Politically the US is incredibly divided, so there’s absolutely no chance you will have every citizen standing side by side, and would more likely have around half join the military’s side.
B. Even if you did, an unorganised mob with assault rifles vs the absolute cutting edge of military technology would be like a large heard of cows trying to stage a mutiny in the world’s most advanced, and efficient abattoir.
LOL. Is this some sort of alternative facts version of history from Prager University or did you sleep thru civics class?
Did you or did you not previously indicate "the whole point of the 2nd amendment is that the citizens are proportionately armed to the government"? Yes, in fact, you did. The US government is armed with such firepower that the 35% of US adults who own a gun, 60+% of whom own just a handgun, would s**t themselves in the face of it given their meager proportional defenses.
It's clear to me you have a very poor understanding of not only the history of the Second Amendment but also of the practicality of US citizens defending themselves against the firepower of a fully engaged US military - if that were to happen, which it isn't given we have an all-volunteer force that's not remotely likely to turn its weapons on the full citizenry. What you are employing is not logic, it's fantasy in defense of an indefensible premise.
All that aside, Amendments to the Constitution as originally written were for their time and place. NONE of the Founders expected them to be immutable, evidenced by the very fact that they allowed for Amendments in the first place.
Military aside, citizens would probably do a damn fine job of annihilating each other. We already do a good job of it.
Sadly that’s true. I’m not even sure why I even humoured his bizarre revolution ideas with a semi-sensible answer in hindsight
So awful and sad for all involved
Do you need to pass a test to show you’re fit and proper to drive a car? Is there a minimum age to be able to drive a car? Are there clauses based on health?
Can this be revoked at any time if the terms of the licence are not adhered to including using under the influence, improper use and general other lawlessness?
Strange how you mention cars, which are so potentially dangerous as you point out, yet they have strict laws to govern them. Should guns have the same?
- Status