How many guns is too many?

[PYRATE]

And why do you feel you have the right to say an "ex con" is not entitled to their second amendment right? I was under the impression that the const applied to all us citizens? Whose rights will you be taking away next??

I don't have the right to strip anyone of their rights, I merely learned this many years ago...

Loss of rights due to felony conviction - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Upgraded Night Vision Monocular Digital Infrared Monocular Telescope for 100% Darkness with 8X Zoom - Grab it through Amazon!

[0121stockpicker]

I don't have the right to strip anyone of their rights, I merely learned this many years ago...

Loss of rights due to felony conviction - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

But isn't this in direct conflict to the second amendment?

 

[0121stockpicker]

I don't have the right to strip anyone of their rights, I merely learned this many years ago...

Loss of rights due to felony conviction - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

HELP pro gun people - how is this not a direct conflict to the second amendment??

 

[worldtalker]

HELP pro gun people - how is this not a direct conflict to the second amendment??

You don't need my help,you got yourself into it,get yourself out!!!!!!!!!!

 

[0121stockpicker]

You don't need my help,you got yourself into it,get yourself out!!!!!!!!!!

Dude, you are really not too good at "getting it" are you? If you could not tell I was in fact not asking for your help. This is what we call "wit". What the statement was saying was for all if the second amendment gun rights people if our right to own guns "can not be infringed" than how can a law that prevents felons, etc, etc from owning guns exist?? Is this not "infringing".

You didn't pick up on that?? Yikes!

 

[0121stockpicker]

Dude, you are really not too good at "getting it" are you? If you could not tell I was in fact not asking for your help. This is what we call "wit". What the statement was saying was for all if the second amendment gun rights people if our right to own guns "can not be infringed" than how can a law that prevents felons, etc, etc from owning guns exist?? Is this not "infringing".

You didn't pick up on that?? Yikes!

Lets just call it a little sarcasm.

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Good point, but that is 320 million.

Oops your correct, I put the decimal in wrong place....

 

[XLTer]

HELP pro gun people - how is this not a direct conflict to the second amendment??

I believe you are 100% correct Stockpicker . A childhood friend of mine just came back to Pa. from AK . While in AK. he was a security guard for transporting valuable items . He legally carried a 45 cal. pistol and a FULL auto rifle . Now , back here in Pa. , he is being denied a firearm because he was found guilty of a felony 30 yrs. ago when he lived here . Breaking & Entering for a stupid case of beer . The felony was the breaking part while entering . Must be different STATE Laws ?

 

[0121stockpicker]

I believe you are 100% correct Stockpicker . A childhood friend of mine just came back to Pa. from AK . While in AK. he was a security guard for transporting valuable items . He legally carried a 45 cal. pistol and a FULL auto rifle . Now , back here in Pa. , he is being denied a firearm because he was found guilty of a felony 30 yrs. ago when he lived here . Breaking & Entering for a stupid case of beer . The felony was the breaking part while entering . Must be different STATE Laws ?

Does anyone know the history of this restriction and how it was not immediately thrown down as unconstitutional. Lets face it once a person has "served their time" aren't they continuing to be punished with this type of restriction? Any thoughts?

 

[0121stockpicker]

I believe you are 100% correct Stockpicker . A childhood friend of mine just came back to Pa. from AK . While in AK. he was a security guard for transporting valuable items . He legally carried a 45 cal. pistol and a FULL auto rifle . Now , back here in Pa. , he is being denied a firearm because he was found guilty of a felony 30 yrs. ago when he lived here . Breaking & Entering for a stupid case of beer . The felony was the breaking part while entering . Must be different STATE Laws ?

So it's just not "violent" crimes? So getting caught with sone pot means you can't have a gun for the rest of your life?

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

No guns for felons. Most of us are familiar with the rule that a convicted felon cannot possess a gun. The federal rule is found in one of the main firearm statutes, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). It says that anyone "who has been convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year" is barred from possessing a gun. The only felonies that are not covered by the federal gun ban are 1) those "pertaining to antitrust violations, unfair trade practices, restraints of trade, or other similar offenses relating to the regulation of business practices," per 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(20)(A); and 2) felony convictions from foreign countries, per Small v. United States, --- U.S. ---, 2005 WL 946620 (April 26, 2005).

 

[0121stockpicker]

No guns for felons. Most of us are familiar with the rule that a convicted felon cannot possess a gun. The federal rule is found in one of the main firearm statutes, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). It says that anyone "who has been convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year" is barred from possessing a gun. The only felonies that are not covered by the federal gun ban are 1) those "pertaining to antitrust violations, unfair trade practices, restraints of trade, or other similar offenses relating to the regulation of business practices," per 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(20)(A); and 2) felony convictions from foreign countries, per Small v. United States, --- U.S. ---, 2005 WL 946620 (April 26, 2005).

Yes we all know the law. The question is given the second amendment, how is that law constitutional?

 

[0121stockpicker]

No guns for felons. Most of us are familiar with the rule that a convicted felon cannot possess a gun. The federal rule is found in one of the main firearm statutes, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). It says that anyone "who has been convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year" is barred from possessing a gun. The only felonies that are not covered by the federal gun ban are 1) those "pertaining to antitrust violations, unfair trade practices, restraints of trade, or other similar offenses relating to the regulation of business practices," per 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(20)(A); and 2) felony convictions from foreign countries, per Small v. United States, --- U.S. ---, 2005 WL 946620 (April 26, 2005).

The right to own arms is not a privilege like a drivers license to be suspended or taken away, it is a Constitutional right.

 

[Crispin]

So it's just not "violent" crimes? So getting caught with sone pot means you can't have a gun for the rest of your life?

The constitution does not define what a felony is. Any law the government makes to limit firearm access to any group is against the constitution and hence not valid. The problem with stopping felons from having guns is that the government can change the definition of a felony as it sees fit. What if the government decides that getting a speeding ticket is a felony? What if the government decides that bad mouthing Obama is a felony? The Chinese government will lock you up and torture your family if you argue against the government. If this is happening in other places then it can happen here as well.

Nobody, for any reason, should have their BoR restricted. If you do not want 'felons' to have access to guns then keep them in prison until they die or accelerate their demise. Any infringement on the second amendment is infringement on the entire BoR and constitution. Without the 2nd amendment there is no protection for the rest of the BoR. The second amendment is what allows those other rights to exist.

Next somebody will be proposing that felons should not be able to write books or speak in public.

Crispin

 

[0121stockpicker]

The constitution does not define what a felony is. Any law the government makes to limit firearm access to any group is against the constitution and hence not valid. The problem with stopping felons from having guns is that the government can change the definition of a felony as it sees fit. What if the government decides that getting a speeding ticket is a felony? What if the government decides that bad mouthing Obama is a felony? The Chinese government will lock you up and torture your family if you argue against the government. If this is happening in other places then it can happen here as well.

Nobody, for any reason, should have their BoR restricted. If you do not want 'felons' to have access to guns then keep them in prison until they die or accelerate their demise. Any infringement on the second amendment is infringement on the entire BoR and constitution. Without the 2nd amendment there is no protection for the rest of the BoR. The second amendment is what allows those other rights to exist.

Next somebody will be proposing that felons should not be able to write books or speak in public.

Crispin

Great point - it's a wide open back door to completely end run the second amendment. Does anyone have any comments in this - seems like a pretty big deal?

 

[PYRATE]

But isn't this in direct conflict to the second amendment?

You'd have to ask someone more knowledgeable than myself, I just recall learning about it way back in high school or college and have since seen stuff about it on Cops and other shows from time to time

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

You no more believe that then you believe in little green men living on moon, first you have to actually believe in the Bill of Rights which you have shown on multiple times that you do not.........

Don't know about the rest of you, but I am tired of stocks little game of the liberal devil's advocate... I am no longer responding to his posts.....

 

[Crispin]

You no more believe that then you believe in little green men living on moon, first you have to actually believe in the Bill of Rights which you have shown on multiple times that you do not.........

Don't know about the rest of you, but I am tired of stocks little game of the liberal devil's advocate... I am no longer responding to his posts.....

I think our founding fathers would be proud of Stockpicker. He is exploring and studying every aspect and angle of the discussion. He laying down a groundwork that supports basic fundamental rights but is not rigid enough to prevent flexibility. Many in the Continental Congress disagreed strongly with each other. It was this disagreement that allowed the forging of the constitution to be the powerful document that it is.

Unless of course, you think Stocky is part of the 5th column...which I myself am not completely sure of. Think about it for a second, it makes perfect sense for the 5th column to come online to forums like this and convince people they do not exist. The success of the 5th column is intricately linked to secrecy and stealth. I'm not even sure Stocky is an American anymore. Has anybody seen his birth certificate?

 

[Buzzlitebeer]

Well I will put my .02 in here!

Anyone remember Waco? Why were they raided? For what reason? <sheep forget about the mainstream reasons>

Are we looking at a larger scale Waco? I am sorry to say people are preparing themselves for the actions of a tyrannical government!

Im just sayin!!!

 

[0121stockpicker]

I think our founding fathers would be proud of Stockpicker. He is exploring and studying every aspect and angle of the discussion. He laying down a groundwork that supports basic fundamental rights but is not rigid enough to prevent flexibility. Many in the Continental Congress disagreed strongly with each other. It was this disagreement that allowed the forging of the constitution to be the powerful document that it is.

Unless of course, you think Stocky is part of the 5th column...which I myself am not completely sure of. Think about it for a second, it makes perfect sense for the 5th column to come online to forums like this and convince people they do not exist. The success of the 5th column is intricately linked to secrecy and stealth. I'm not even sure Stocky is an American anymore. Has anybody seen his birth certificate?

Now, now girls there is no need to fight over da' picker. There is plenty o' picker to go around.

And I was born in Hawaii, yeh that's it Hawaii. Stock Hussein picker is the name. And I'm not afraid of the new world order - I am the new world order. Be afraid, be very afraid!!