Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnsocat
We are not talking about nukes, cruise missiles and tanks... we are talking about guns...
Disregard my point with semantics because that solves the problem under discussion?
|
NO, we are talking about (the post I replied to) the 2nd amendment specifically not allowing limitations or restrictions. I suggest that not allowing automatic weapons is a restriction, and if automatic weapons are allowed, then rockets should be allowed, and if rockets, then Cruise. And why not airplanes, and if airplanes why not F35s. And not allowing functional tanks is a restriction in my "right" to arm myself to take back my government with the wrong party wins the election.
My post was exactly on the topic it was replied to (if yours, I don't recall, but it was 2nd amendment and restrictions on gun ownership).
However, the constitution does not specifically say that Tanks and Warplanes are off the table. So by the recent leaked decision of the SCOTUS that rights are not rights, that are not enumerated are not rights. Therefore, there is NO restriction or limit on the right to bare arms. Seems a pretty straight forward extrapolation.
You can't have it your way, and n to allow me to have mine. If I want to own a Tank in what way does the government have the right to deny me that weapon of choice? Where does the constitution say - except for tanks.