A three-judge panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ruled Tuesday that the federal ban against 18-20-year-olds buying handguns is unconstitutional.

Honestly, every American should be armed, especially women. Lord knows cops weren't purse carry convenient with their doughnut and coffee work diet before, but the body armor and combat boots has just made it damn near impossible. Besides, people ignore whistles, but nobody ignores a firearm discharging.

link

[–] • 1 pt

The question to force the gun control nit wits to answer is, Does a 'ban' on firearms work on the streets in Chicago, Baltimore, LA. or NY? Of course the answer is No. So, why not ban criminals?

link

[–] • 1 pt

huray! a win! every win is a good one. and to all you people who wanna stop black people from owning guns, don't worry black people are far more likely to use those guns on each other first, as you well know. So if you look at it that way this could end up being a win for you.

link

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt

alot will go to those doing the arresting and interrogating I suppose???

parent
link

[–] • 0 pt

There is No One in the Federal Gov. that can stand and justify 'gun control' in any form because the result of gun control is open for all to see. Chicago+gun control=762 murders every year, and Baltimore = 300. It is obvious that gun control has Never 'controlled' a single Criminal.

link

[–] [deleted] • 1 pt

I don't give a fuck if it has or not. That implies that if it DID control a single criminal then it would be morally permissible to take everyones guns.

parent
link

[–] • 0 pt

Wrong idea. Felons, which are 80% of the Shooters in these crimes should Not be allowed to have firearms. Of course 'gun control' is not meant for them it is meant for US.

parent
link

[–] • 1 pt

Felony/misdemeanor is the wrong line. Should be violent vs non-violent crime. Was there a victim and was there bodily harm?

parent
link

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt

(edited )

Oh really? Can you show me in the constitution where it says that?

Only felons shouldn't have firearms! It's common sense gun control!

Where do you think all of this shit started exactly? "I mean it's just common sense, felons are dangerous and shouldn't have guns. And, well, surely if FELONS can't have guns then we need registries of gun owners so we can make them hand over their guns if they are convicted of a felony. And if felons can't own guns then neither should the mentally ill, since the logic behind barring felons is that they're mentally unfit. And logically if you have to be mentally fit then you should pass a mental health evaluations before buying a gun. And we should have red flag gun laws too, so we can flag people who are mentally unfit and take away their guns JUST in case they're thinking about doing something crazy."

Oh, and also, (this is the part that comes at the end) if you discriminate against minorities, gays, trannies, or oppose the government, you're a criminal, AND you're mentally ill, you're a potential dangerous terrorist, AND you can't have guns.

Make sure to report your neighbors (theblaze.com) if you're concerned they might be falling into right-wing extremism! We'll flag them right away.

parent
link

Load more (1 reply)

[–] • 1 pt

Wrong. Restricting niggers from having guns is both logical and justified, but would be against the current version of the Constitution. Same with kikes.

That said, the original Constitution would be consistent with doing both, because neither kikes or niggers are "Men" by definition of the Constitution, which included only White European humans, not subhuman monkey inbreds or subhuman sandnigger inbreds.

parent
link

[–] • 1 pt

I agree but it is not realistic. My point is always the same. A law against an 'object' (booze, drugs or firearms) has Never worked and THEY Know it. Gun control assumes a crime before any crime has happened, but hanging for violent felons will deter all but the really stupid.