HaveRopeWillBind
Posts: 514
Joined: 7/15/2006 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Greta75 quote:
ORIGINAL: HaveRopeWillBind Greta It also doesn't say there is a limit on the arms that are allowed. In the US if the Constitution doesn't specifically prohibit something, then it is considered to be legal. The clear part of the law is that, you MUST be allowed to have guns. That's the only part with no ambiguity. Any other parts with ambiguity, the current law makers can interpret it however they want. Often local governments try to pass restrictive gun laws. So far, every one of those restrictions that has been challenged in the Supreme Court has been overturned. It's pretty well fixed in law at this point. Personally I have no valid need or use for a fully-automatic weapon, or for one modified by a bump-stock or trigger crank for high fire rate, but that should be my choice and not anyone else's. Frankly, the bump-stock is a lot like machine pistols, hard to control and mostly only good for spraying a crowd. Most gun owners here would never want one normally. Though I suspect that they will have an immediate surge in sales among gang types and more law abiding gun owners who might think it would be cool to shoot up a bunch of soda bottles out on a target range. The press has given bump-stocks the equivalent of millions of dollars worth of advertising in the last few days, so they are bound to sell like hotcakes to people who never would have considered such a thing before. The press never learns that by screaming against guns they become the best gun salesmen ever.
|