world

U.S. Supreme Court to take up right to carry gun for self-defense

67 Comments
By MARK SHERMAN

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2021 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

67 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

Just remember, the NRA is so convinced that carrying a fire arm makes you so safe, they ban them in their conventions, meetings and offices.

17 ( +21 / -4 )

Around 14 U.S. states already allow concealed carry without a permit.

This is insanity.

9 ( +15 / -6 )

As if gun rights need to be expanded in the US.

6 ( +13 / -7 )

Just remember, the NRA is so convinced that carrying a fire arm makes you so safe, they ban them in their conventions, meetings and offices.

No, they follow the laws of whatever state those events happen to be in.

Pretty hard to ban guns at an event selling guns.

“Approximately 850 exhibitors will provide an exhibit hall that offers attendees a one of a kind experience with thousands of firearms on display from all their favorite manufacturers.”

-6 ( +4 / -10 )

The issue of carrying a gun for self-defense has been seen for several years as the next major step for gun rights at the Supreme Court, following decisions in 2008 and 2010 that established a nationwide right to keep a gun at home for self-defense.

And they’ve never touched the issue of whether that right extends to outside of the home. In fact, the Heller ruling says that bans on ‘carrying concealed weapons’ are lawful.

As a may issue state, New York simply applies stronger requirements to qualify for their pistol license; ie an imminent need to carry for self defense, like if you are actively being stalked, as opposed to a general need.

-7 ( +2 / -9 )

Yee haa, it’ll be just like the wild Wild West again.

9 ( +10 / -1 )

Yee haa, it’ll be just like the wild Wild West again.

You mean like when towns banned the carrying of firearms?

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/gun-control-old-west-180968013/

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

I have always believed that an American is not a complete citizen unless he is armed. The national ideal is a 24/7 fully armed citizenry acting in countervailance to everyone else within shotgun range.

Americans are so lucky yet I see so many of them complaining.

-7 ( +2 / -9 )

The national ideal is a 24/7 fully armed citizenry acting in countervailance to everyone else within shotgun range.

Or a glock . an armed society is a polite society

-2 ( +6 / -8 )

Just remember, the NRA is so convinced that carrying a fire arm makes you so safe, they ban them in their conventions, meetings and offices.

The Supreme Court must uphold the Constitution and overturn New York’s infringement of civil rights. You just can’t decree a Constitution no longer applies because circumstances have changed. To change the law you must follow the law. Amend the Constitution or shut up and dribble.

-7 ( +3 / -10 )

Just remember, the NRA is so convinced that carrying a fire arm makes you so safe,

It does.

they ban them in their conventions, meetings and offices.

Same when you to meet Biden or even going to a Madonna concert. So what’s your point?

-9 ( +3 / -12 )

Same when you to meet Biden or even going to a Madonna concert. So what’s your point?

The point, which is painfully obvious, is that the NRA is a bunch of hypocrites.

You're welcome.

12 ( +16 / -4 )

You just can’t decree a Constitution no longer applies because circumstances have changed. To change the law you must follow the law. Amend the Constitution or shut up and dribble.

You know, like all those pro-Trump domestic terrorists who stormed the Capitol on Jan 5th to hang Mike Pence...and overthrow our Constitution...

This case will show us if the conservative judges are similar to their far-right brethren - insecure, scared, and helpless - whose only sense of self and power comes from carrying a gun...

4 ( +6 / -2 )

I don't think this decision will really change much of anything.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

How did we get from a well regulated militia to crazies with semi-automatic weapons shooting the innocent? What kind of semi-automatic did John Adams keep in the window of his pickup truck?

6 ( +7 / -1 )

If you support the 2nd Amendment then obviously you'd have to support the "regulated" part of it as well. If you don't, then you're not really supportive of the Amendment.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

whats this word salad about?

“Gun violence has only worsened during the pandemic, and a ruling that opened the door to weakening our gun laws could make it even harder for cities and states to grapple with this public health crisis,”

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Conservatives hold a 6-3 advantage so we all know where this is headed: further back to the days of Tombstone and the Wild West and "he needs killing."

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Farmboy, at the time of writing "well-regulated" merely meant well equipped. In other words, equipped with arms. Nothing to do with laws or rules. "Militia" meant citizens in general.

The big problem IMHO is the mishmash of contradicting and confusing laws from state to state, even city to city. This needs to be clarified by the court. Constitutional rights don't end at state borders.

In any case, crime in general and gun crime in particular had been dropping steadily from the 90s to 2020. Even though the number of guns in the country increased. Last year and into this year, many cities have seen horrible increases in violent crime and homicide. Wonder why...

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

What kind of semi-automatic did John Adams keep in the window of his pickup truck?

maybe a Puckle gun, a ferguson rifle, a Girandoni air rifle or a a German breech-loading matchlock arquebus. All were rapid fire (the puckle gun had a pre-loaded cylinder which held 11 charges and could fire 63 shots in seven minutes - 9 a minute) and all available at the time the of Constitution  

https://arizonadailyindependent.com/2018/03/11/multi-shot-assault-weapons-of-the-1700s-and-the-2nd-amendment/

Another question: what kind of computer or smartphone did John Adams use to exercise his freedom of speech?

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

The right to carry a firearm in public for self-defense?

When is self-defense be construed as a real self-defense?

Americans love guns, they would defend for their basic rights. Their ancestors knew what 'Have gun will travel' meant.

Nobody can snatch guns away from them..

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Same when you to meet Biden or even going to a Madonna concert. So what’s your point?

The point, which is painfully obvious, is that the NRA is a bunch of hypocrites.

You're welcome.

So what do you call it when gungrabbing Biden harris and probably Madonna are surrounded by armed security?

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

If someone wishes to carry a firearm into the "public square", it only makes sense they would have formal training, like required for concealed-carry permits.

I don't feel unsafe or more safe just because someone else had a firearm on their hip. There certainly are crazy "fine people" on both sides of this argument.

I've never felt the need to have a firearm for protection, though I did spend an hour at an outdoor range today shooting at some targets. Target shooting is really fun, but I don't expect to be allowed to do that inside a city park, unless they have a public range.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The point, which is painfully obvious, is that the NRA is a bunch of hypocrites.

Liberals as well on this issue

You're welcome.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

If you support the 2nd Amendment then obviously you'd have to support the "regulated" part of it as well. If you don't, then you're not really supportive of the Amendment.

According to liberal orthodoxy? Yeah, sounds logical....

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

back to the days of Tombstone and the Wild West and "he needs killing."

This Tombstone?

"And one fact is usually ignored: Back then, Tombstone had far stricter gun control than it does today. In fact, the American West’s most infamous gun battle erupted when the marshal tried to enforce a local ordinance that barred carrying firearms in public. A judge had fined one of the victims $25 earlier that day for packing a pistol.

“You could wear your gun into town, but you had to check it at the sheriff’s office or the Grand Hotel, and you couldn’t pick it up again until you were leaving town,” said Bob Boze Bell, executive editor of True West Magazine, which celebrates the Old West. “It was an effort to control the violence.”"

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2011-jan-23-la-na-tombstone-20110123-story.html

As for the NRA banning guns at conventions:

FIREARMS POLICY FOR THE NRA ANNUAL MEETINGS & EXHIBITS

During the 2019 NRA Annual Meetings & Exhibits, lawfully carried firearms will be permitted in the Indiana Convention Center and the Lucas Oil Stadium,l in accordance with Indiana law. When carrying your firearm remember to follow all federal, state, and local laws.

https://www.nraam.org/attend/firearms-policy/

As I said earlier, and which everyone ignored, it depends on the laws of the state.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

To the gun zealots, open carry ought to apply at elementary and junior high schools...

In their logic, just think how many less fights and school yard taunts we would have if every little 8 year old was packing a Glock...

And if some far-right nut with an AR15 came into the school - he'd be dead meat - well, maybe after taking out a few students...

We ought to call these gun-worshippers "Regressives" since they want to take our society back to the stone age...

3 ( +3 / -0 )

To the gun zealots, open carry ought to apply at elementary and junior high schools...

I agree especially in schools and cities that have a high crime rate.

In their logic, just think how many less fights and school yard taunts we would have if every little 8 year old was packing a Glock...

Teachers not students. Not one person is suggesting that kids should carry guns.

And if some far-right nut with an AR15 came into the school - he'd be dead meat - well, maybe after taking out a few students...

If the teacher is trained, shouldn’t happen

We ought to call these gun-worshippers "Regressives" since they want to take our society back to the stone age...

No, because they’re not the ones that want to strip them of their 2nd amendment rights.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

So what do you call it when gungrabbing Biden harris and probably Madonna are surrounded by armed security?

The gun grabber part I call hyperbolic nonsense. The security part I call reasonable given all the untrained gun nutters out there.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

The majority of teachers do not want to be armed or carry weapons. What happens when some crazed kid grabs the gun?

Schools need better weapons discovery machines when people are entering buildings.

Restricted the type of guns allowed is not a violation of the 2nd Amendment. Does not state that all guns and weapons are allowed.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

If the teacher is trained, shouldn’t happen

Teachers should be focused on teaching, not keeping their firearm skills honed to the point of being able to effectively deal with an active shooter.

Phew. That was sooo mentally taxing, I think I need a nap.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

The majority of teachers do not want to be armed or carry weapons. What happens when some crazed kid grabs the gun?

Another armed teacher rushes into the classroom and opens fire, saving the day. Obviously.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

The gun grabber part I call hyperbolic nonsense

please elaborate. heres what I see

Ban the manufacture and sale of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines

Regulate possession of existing assault weapons under the National Firearms Act

Buy back the assault weapons and high-capacity magazines already in our communities.

Reduce stockpiling of weapons

End the online sale of firearms and ammunitions

and the list goes on.

https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

tooheysnewToday  08:21 am JST

Yee haa, it’ll be just like the wild Wild West again.

And a lot of Americans have not evolved beyond those times, nor have they grown up.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

please elaborate. heres what I see

Ban the manufacture and sale of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines

Regulate possession of existing assault weapons under the National Firearms Act

Buy back the assault weapons and high-capacity magazines already in our communities.

Reduce stockpiling of weapons

End the online sale of firearms and ammunitions

and the list goes on.

Where is the grabbing in all of this? I know you conservatives thin alliteration makes you sound smart, but words have meanings for a reason.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

The gun grabber part I call hyperbolic nonsense.

Because other than abolishing the 2nd amendment, liberals have nothing

The security part I call reasonable given all the untrained gun nutters out there.

Yes, therefore we need more cops and not less and watch gun sales continue to spike if the libs won’t stop their jihad on attacking law-abiding citizens.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Ban the manufacture and sale of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines

Regulate possession of existing assault weapons under the National Firearms Act

Buy back the assault weapons and high-capacity magazines already in our communities.

Reduce stockpiling of weapons

End the online sale of firearms and ammunitions

This all seems extremely sensible and actually helpful.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Because other than abolishing the 2nd amendment, liberals have nothing

You’d have a point if liberals were trying to abolish the Second Amendment.

Yes, therefore we need more cops and not less and watch gun sales continue to spike if the libs won’t stop their jihad on attacking law-abiding citizens.

We need more cops because of conservatives gun nutters. We agree.

Libs aren’t on a jihad attacking law-abiding citizens. More hyperbole.

Thanks for always contributing so much to the conversations here. I really appreciate how you interact with an eye towards dialogue and not simply to “own” other posters.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

This all seems extremely sensible and actually helpful.

So you didn’t see the grabbing part either? Thought I forgot how to read for a moment.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

You’d have a point if liberals were trying to abolish the Second Amendment.

They are the ones screaming about it , so yes.

We need more cops because of conservatives gun nutters. We agree.

NYC is nowhere near anything conservative, keep deflecting, doesn’t help the city as cops continue to retire. Maybe Snake Pliskan can figure it out.

Libs aren’t on a jihad attacking law-abiding citizens. More hyperbole. 

Yes, they are. Show me 10 conservatives that agree with the Dems? Bet you can’t.

This all seems extremely sensible and actually helpful

Will never happen.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

They are the ones screaming about it , so yes.

Liberals aren’t screaming to abolish the Second Amendment. You really need to stop watching Tucker Carlson.

NYC is nowhere near anything conservative, keep deflecting, doesn’t help the city as cops continue to retire. Maybe Snake Pliskan can figure it out.

Go back and read the comments so you can see who is deflecting.

Yes, they are. Show me 10 conservatives that agree with the Dems? Bet you can’t.

This is completely irrelevant to liberal not being on a jihad attacking law-abiding citizens.

Your posts are always so thoughtful and thought-provoking. We are lucky to have you on these threads day in and day out.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

To the gun zealots, open carry ought to apply at elementary and junior high schools...

I agree especially in schools and cities that have a high crime rate.

Get that? Elementary school kids should be allowed to carry guns - because well, they have the maturity...

In their logic, just think how many less fights and school yard taunts we would have if every little 8 year old was packing a Glock...

Teachers not students. Not one person is suggesting that kids should carry guns.

See your words above...

And if some far-right nut with an AR15 came into the school - he'd be dead meat - well, maybe after taking out a few students...

If the teacher is trained, shouldn’t happen

Kids need training too?

We ought to call these gun-worshippers "Regressives" since they want to take our society back to the stone age...

No, because they’re not the ones that want to strip them of their 2nd amendment rights.

Pro-Trump far-right gun worshippers prefer abolishing the whole Constitution - and hanging Mike Pence...

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Liberals aren’t screaming to abolish the Second Amendment. You really need to stop watching Tucker Carlson.

Yes they are and you don’t have to believe me, the spike in gun sales and police defending are more than enough evidence, not to mention BIden and AOC screaming about punishing law-abiding citizens.

This is completely irrelevant to liberal not being on a jihad attacking law-abiding citizens.

Again, the guns sales say otherwise, nice try..

Kids need training too?

If you live on a farm or a crime ridden area in your home, maybe .

Pro-Trump far-right gun worshippers prefer abolishing the whole Constitution

No, but Biden does

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Yes they are and you don’t have to believe me, the spike in gun sales and police defending are more than enough evidence, not to mention BIden and AOC screaming about punishing law-abiding citizens.

None of this reflects reality. You simply see liberal monsters everywhere you look. It’s rather adorable, but not real.

Again, the guns sales say otherwise, nice try..

Gun sales somehow prove that liberals are on a jihad attacking law-abiding citizens? Sure, that makes sense.

No, but Biden does

Asinine.

Your fact-based posts are so persuasive. I appreciate how you never let your emotions interfere with your critical discourse skills.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

None of this reflects reality.

Again, you can’t convince me or the spiking gun sales, that’s the reality...

Gun sales somehow prove that liberals are on a jihad attacking law-abiding citizens?

They think so, please talk to them.

Sure, that makes sense.

Yes.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

Look, if liberals want to talk about sensible solutions instead of just banning weapons as the first mental reflex, but remain quiet once you bring in mental illness then they don’t want to talk about it and as long as they refuse to look at this from every angle, their insane hysterical rationale is and will not help them now or in 2022 because the lack of trust and having a one-sided perspective on the issue.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Again, you can’t convince me or the spiking gun sales, that’s the reality...

I’m not trying to convince you; I’m preventing your disinformation from going unchallenged.

They think so, please talk to them.

You’ve literally come full circle on this. You claimed liberals are on a jihad attacking law-abiding citizens. I challenged you, then you claimed gun sales proved your point. Never mind, no real reason to finish this.

Nah, I’m done feeding the troll for today.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

This all seems extremely sensible and actually helpful.

So you didn’t see the grabbing part either?

Come on. Buy backs? ban the sale of..? regulate possession of...? reduce stockpiles? end the sale of? All infringements on "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms"

Thought I forgot how to read for a moment.

Cognitive dissonance will do that.

Red flag laws take guns away from gun owners without due process. Gun storage laws prevent the use of them for self defense and so do waiting periods. Smart guns don't work and often can't be used for lawful purposes closing so called loopholes prevents transfers of firearms between family members and friends. all chipping away at our first freedom. All part of the very long list I posted to that you obviously didn't read or understand.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

I’m not trying to convince you; I’m preventing your disinformation from going unchallenged.

Nope, Google it. These are booming time for gun dealers.

You’ve literally come full circle on this. You claimed liberals are on a jihad attacking law-abiding citizens.

True. Next time, let’s talk about guns and the mental issue that intertwined with it. Can’t ignore it.

.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Come on. Buy backs? ban the sale of..? regulate possession of...? reduce stockpiles? end the sale of? All infringements on "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms"

None of this is grabbing guns, which is what you claimed.

Red flag laws take guns away from gun owners without due process. Gun storage laws prevent the use of them for self defense and so do waiting periods. Smart guns don't work and often can't be used for lawful purposes closing so called loopholes prevents transfers of firearms between family members and friends. all chipping away at our first freedom. All part of the very long list I posted to that you obviously didn't read or understand.

I read the list and understand that there isn’t example of guns being grabbed from anyone. You should try writing better if you want to be understood by rational adults instead of needing to backtrack.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

What a sad place the US is. The fact that anyone feels having a gun is necessary means there are fundamental problems in the US that haven't been fixed for over 200 years. That's a D minus for progress. Wake up and realize your normal is definitely not normal.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

You should try writing better if you want to be understood by rational adults instead of needing to backtrack.

That wasn’t nice. Rational adults wouldn’t say such things. How about admitting that we have a nation that also suffers from lack of mental acknowledgment. Let’s be honest. Calling out people for telling the truth will not bolster or support the liberals deflection from the real issues. Guns and confiscation of them are not supporting arguments.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

I read the list and understand that there isn’t example of guns being grabbed from anyone. You should try writing better if you want to be understood by rational adults instead of needing to backtrack.

Maybe, but putting your hands over your ears and going lalalala isnt an argument.

How about buybacks? you have a choice of giving up your semi-auto rifle, or having to pay a tax on something you have already bought if you want to keep it. if you're going to make the argument that the tax is only $200 then you don't live in the real world. also its per firearm. some people have many.

A red flag law means your ex can tell a judge, without proof, that you threatended to hurt them, and you'll have your guns taken away.

Thats gun grabbing. the rest is just infringements on our rights.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

The national ideal is a 24/7 fully armed citizenry acting in countervailance to everyone else within shotgun range.

By your logic the U.S., with the highest rate of civilian gun ownership in the world, should be the safest place. While it is far from the most dangerous, it certainly isn't the safest. Further, Japan has extremely strict gun control and very few guns, and in my experience is incredibly safe.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

How about buybacks? you have a choice of giving up your semi-auto rifle, or having to pay a tax on something you have already bought if you want to keep it. if you're going to make the argument that the tax is only $200 then you don't live in the real world. also its per firearm. some people have many.

Yeah, that's not how gun buybacks work. If you want to get rid of your gun, they will pay you for the gun. If you don't, there's no penalty- you just won't get paid.

A red flag law means your ex can tell a judge, without proof, that you threatended to hurt them, and you'll have your guns taken away.

Again, that isn't how a red flag law works. The complaint is made, the gun owner shows up to court and based on the testimony of the gun owner and the complainant and decision is rendered. Even if the gun is confiscated, it isn't permanent.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

P. Smith,

You should try writing better if you want to be understood by rational adults instead of needing to backtrack.

I agree with you on this issue, but in my opinion when you resort to insults, you lose the argument.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

I have not read anything anywhere about the democrats, or any other major group wanting the abolish the 2nd Amendment. That's just put about by the gun nutters and their NRA.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Even if the gun is confiscated, it isn't permanent.

No gun owner believes that nonsense. And if seems liberals are having a hard time convincing 140 million registered gun owners. Again, never going to happen.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

I have not read anything anywhere about the democrats, or any other major group wanting the abolish the 2nd Amendment. That's just put about by the gun nutters and their NRA.

That’s ok, you can call us nutters, won’t stop the growing gun sales

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Yeah, that's not how gun buybacks work. If you want to get rid of your gun, they will pay you for the gun. If you don't, there's no penalty- you just won't get paid.

Actually, no. In New Zealand, there was an amnesty period for the buy back, after which the possession of the gun became illegal So you could sell it, or become a criminal. Hardly 'no penalty.'

In Biden's proposal, you either sell it, or pay a tax on it. Biden's is less 'compulsory' but forcing people to pay taxes on things they've already bought and paid for, is still a penalty. And if you don't pay your tax of course...

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

 140 million registered gun owners

There is no register of 140 million gun owners. There are not even that many gun owners in the first place. At 60% don't even own a firearm.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/215655/number-of-registered-weapons-in-the-us-by-state/

just 3% of American adults own a collective 133m firearms

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/nov/15/the-gun-numbers-just-3-of-american-adults-own-a-collective-133m-firearms

There are probably now 400 million guns for 331 million people (including children).

According to a widely cited 2016 study by the University of Washington’s Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, the U.S. is second only to Brazil in number of total gun deaths.

The exact number of U.S. gun owners is unclear due to the fact that there is no federal registration requirement or similar regulation that would enable an official count. In fact, federal law prohibits a central registry of firearms owned by private citizens.

A central gun ownership register would be a good start.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

you have a choice of giving up your semi-auto rifle, or having to pay a tax on something you have already bought if you want to keep it. if you're going to make the argument that the tax is only $200 then you don't live in the real world

How much tax do you pay on your car, that you've already paid for?

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Again, that isn't how a red flag law works. The complaint is made, the gun owner shows up to court and based on the testimony of the gun owner and the complainant and decision is rendered. Even if the gun is confiscated, it isn't permanent.

In a perfect world, sure. However;

"Most red flag laws are vague on what constitutes a “significant danger,” which gives courts broad discretion to seize firearms, (Orland lawyer Kendra) Parris said. And in some states, respondents are not guaranteed representation in court, since these are civil and not criminal matters."

https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2019/09/04/red-flag-laws-spur-debate-over-due-process

0 ( +1 / -1 )

2022 déjà vu all over again

Can never be deja vu for something that happens in the future.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Can never be deja vu for something that happens in the future

You know what I mean, at this point, the Democrats are done in two years. And just like what happened in 2009, we are going to see repeated that in 2011 2014 and we will see the same thing in 2022

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

According to a widely cited 2016 study by the University of Washington’s Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, the U.S. is second only to Brazil in number of total gun deaths.

That is probably true, but there are two many reasons. Mental illness, gangs, assaults there are many reasons, most of them the Democrats don’t wanna talk about

The exact number of U.S. gun owners is unclear due to the fact that there is no federal registration requirement or similar regulation that would enable an official count. In fact, federal law prohibits a central registry of firearms owned by private citizens.

why does the government have to know everything I do, it’s bad enough that when I go on the Internet I get pop-ups from Amazon asking me if I want to buy this product or that product, no thanks.

A central gun ownership register would be a good start.

Won’t happen.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

How much tax do you pay on your car, that you've already paid for?

False equivalency. I paid sales tax on it once, when I bought it. the rest is road user charges. if you want to say this tax on firearms is user charges, I'd say I pay that on bullets.

And no one is forcing me to give up my car or become a criminal. Would you be happy if you were told to either pay tax on your bicycle again, sell it to the government or become an outlaw? how about your furniture, or anything else you've bought and paid for?

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites