I've said time and again I'm okay with reasonable restrictions.
I don't know what I need to say to assure you I completely understand and support this.
1 They're severely restricted, not banned. 2 If you want a fully automatic firearm, you can have one. Bumpstocks? Not really sure why but people...
I agreed with the first quote. What questions haven't I answered?
I have no argument with anything in this post . I don't see how it supports overturning RvW as equal to an ammendment being overturned.
I'm aware. Now you know. For Pete's sake, it's the bill of rights, plural. And the ammendments are numbered, so there's at least two...
A poor decision the SC made was overturned. No ammendments were changed in the least. I've never seen anything written in the 2ndA mentioning...
Whose blood exactly? The blood of criminals thwarted by someone legally carrying, after the criminal got used to his prey being unarmed?
This is 100% correct. Have at it and let's see how it works out.
It's off topic, but which ammendment was overturned when they changed the decision on RvW?
They don't. Just another thing you don't know.
I'm not particularly concerned about where my right to protect my free state of existence came from. I'm glad I have it and I'm glad my...
[ATTACH]
Your interpretation is wrong. It upholds a right, it doesn't grant one that never existed.
Who is asking for machine guns? And who says free for all firearms? Just no arbitrary infringements. It's a right, Not a privilege.
If I was to ever use one of those stupid, meant for women emoji things, this would get the roll eyes one.
You should consider reading this. District of Columbia v. Heller - Wikipedia Republished // WIKI 2
[MEDIA] I don't imagine these facts will be welcome here, but here they are.
Separate names with a comma.
