Common Sense Gun Laws

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Some good news: The Supreme Court today declined to intervene and block the Illinois ban on assault weapons and high capacity magazines. No noted dissents. (Note: This would have required five votes.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Some good news: The Supreme Court today declined to intervene and block the Illinois ban on assault weapons and high capacity magazines. No noted dissents. (Note: This would have required five votes.)

No surprise waiting for this case and similar ones in other democratic run states to work their way up through the circuit courts. Then they can issue a clear decision on all of them.

Hopefully will include the line - what part of “shall not be infringed” don’t you people get.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some good news: The Supreme Court today declined to intervene and block the Illinois ban on assault weapons and high capacity magazines. No noted dissents. (Note: This would have required five votes.)

No surprise waiting for this case and similar ones in other democratic run states to work their way up through the circuit courts. Then they can issue a clear decision on all of them.

Hopefully will include the line - what part of “shall not be infringed” don’t you people get.

Gun owners are not at all being infringed. They are still being allowed fully functional handguns with normal capacity magazines, along with fully functional ordinary hunting rifles with normal capacity magazines that don't look like military weapons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some good news: The Supreme Court today declined to intervene and block the Illinois ban on assault weapons and high capacity magazines. No noted dissents. (Note: This would have required five votes.)

No surprise waiting for this case and similar ones in other democratic run states to work their way up through the circuit courts. Then they can issue a clear decision on all of them.

Hopefully will include the line - what part of “shall not be infringed” don’t you people get.

Gun owners are not at all being infringed. They are still being allowed fully functional handguns with normal capacity magazines, along with fully functional ordinary hunting rifles with normal capacity magazines that don't look like military weapons.

Sure. Sure. Let's roll back the internet to dial-up speed and start riding around on horses while we're at it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some good news: The Supreme Court today declined to intervene and block the Illinois ban on assault weapons and high capacity magazines. No noted dissents. (Note: This would have required five votes.)

No surprise waiting for this case and similar ones in other democratic run states to work their way up through the circuit courts. Then they can issue a clear decision on all of them.

Hopefully will include the line - what part of “shall not be infringed” don’t you people get.

Gun owners are not at all being infringed. They are still being allowed fully functional handguns with normal capacity magazines, along with fully functional ordinary hunting rifles with normal capacity magazines that don't look like military weapons.

Sure. Sure. Let's roll back the internet to dial-up speed and start riding around on horses while we're at it.

We had a ban for 20 years and it was fine. Relax.

[Anonymous]

10 years*

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some good news: The Supreme Court today declined to intervene and block the Illinois ban on assault weapons and high capacity magazines. No noted dissents. (Note: This would have required five votes.)

No surprise waiting for this case and similar ones in other democratic run states to work their way up through the circuit courts. Then they can issue a clear decision on all of them.

Hopefully will include the line - what part of “shall not be infringed” don’t you people get.

Gun owners are not at all being infringed. They are still being allowed fully functional handguns with normal capacity magazines, along with fully functional ordinary hunting rifles with normal capacity magazines that don't look like military weapons.

Sure. Sure. Let's roll back the internet to dial-up speed and start riding around on horses while we're at it.

That a stupid analogy. We don't have to allow cutting edge weapons technology be available for purchase. Lets give everyone a sophisticated little nuke then. That would be so great.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some good news: The Supreme Court today declined to intervene and block the Illinois ban on assault weapons and high capacity magazines. No noted dissents. (Note: This would have required five votes.)

No surprise waiting for this case and similar ones in other democratic run states to work their way up through the circuit courts. Then they can issue a clear decision on all of them.

Hopefully will include the line - what part of “shall not be infringed” don’t you people get.

How have you never read the Heller decision in all this time. Go read it, please.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some good news: The Supreme Court today declined to intervene and block the Illinois ban on assault weapons and high capacity magazines. No noted dissents. (Note: This would have required five votes.)

No surprise waiting for this case and similar ones in other democratic run states to work their way up through the circuit courts. Then they can issue a clear decision on all of them.

Hopefully will include the line - what part of “shall not be infringed” don’t you people get.

Gun owners are not at all being infringed. They are still being allowed fully functional handguns with normal capacity magazines, along with fully functional ordinary hunting rifles with normal capacity magazines that don't look like military weapons.

Sure. Sure. Let's roll back the internet to dial-up speed and start riding around on horses while we're at it.

Well, you right wingers all DO constantly keep talking about how we need to go back to the Founding Fathers ideas where it comes to regulation so why should guns be any different in your ideology?

The Founding Fathers didn't think you were being infringed on when all you had was muzzle loading flintlock muskets. If it was good enough for them, it's good enough for you.

Now go sit down and shut up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some good news: The Supreme Court today declined to intervene and block the Illinois ban on assault weapons and high capacity magazines. No noted dissents. (Note: This would have required five votes.)

No surprise waiting for this case and similar ones in other democratic run states to work their way up through the circuit courts. Then they can issue a clear decision on all of them.

Hopefully will include the line - what part of “shall not be infringed” don’t you people get.

Gun owners are not at all being infringed. They are still being allowed fully functional handguns with normal capacity magazines, along with fully functional ordinary hunting rifles with normal capacity magazines that don't look like military weapons.

Found the gun racist!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some good news: The Supreme Court today declined to intervene and block the Illinois ban on assault weapons and high capacity magazines. No noted dissents. (Note: This would have required five votes.)

No surprise waiting for this case and similar ones in other democratic run states to work their way up through the circuit courts. Then they can issue a clear decision on all of them.

Hopefully will include the line - what part of “shall not be infringed” don’t you people get.

Gun owners are not at all being infringed. They are still being allowed fully functional handguns with normal capacity magazines, along with fully functional ordinary hunting rifles with normal capacity magazines that don't look like military weapons.

Sure. Sure. Let's roll back the internet to dial-up speed and start riding around on horses while we're at it.

Well, you right wingers all DO constantly keep talking about how we need to go back to the Founding Fathers ideas where it comes to regulation so why should guns be any different in your ideology?

The Founding Fathers didn't think you were being infringed on when all you had was muzzle loading flintlock muskets. If it was good enough for them, it's good enough for you.

Now go sit down and shut up.

DP

Sorry, but you don’t have the freedom to post that. The first amendment only covers you if you write with a quill pen, use a Gutenberg press, or shout it out loud like a towne cry’r.

You’ll be sentenced to 24 hours in the stocks now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some good news: The Supreme Court today declined to intervene and block the Illinois ban on assault weapons and high capacity magazines. No noted dissents. (Note: This would have required five votes.)

No surprise waiting for this case and similar ones in other democratic run states to work their way up through the circuit courts. Then they can issue a clear decision on all of them.

Hopefully will include the line - what part of “shall not be infringed” don’t you people get.

Gun owners are not at all being infringed. They are still being allowed fully functional handguns with normal capacity magazines, along with fully functional ordinary hunting rifles with normal capacity magazines that don't look like military weapons.

Sure. Sure. Let's roll back the internet to dial-up speed and start riding around on horses while we're at it.

We had a ban for 20 years and it was fine. Relax.

It most definitely was not fine. Tens of thousands of people were sentenced to lengthy prison terms in that time because they possessed things that were perfectly legal before the law turned them into criminals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some good news: The Supreme Court today declined to intervene and block the Illinois ban on assault weapons and high capacity magazines. No noted dissents. (Note: This would have required five votes.)

No surprise waiting for this case and similar ones in other democratic run states to work their way up through the circuit courts. Then they can issue a clear decision on all of them.

Hopefully will include the line - what part of “shall not be infringed” don’t you people get.

Gun owners are not at all being infringed. They are still being allowed fully functional handguns with normal capacity magazines, along with fully functional ordinary hunting rifles with normal capacity magazines that don't look like military weapons.

Sure. Sure. Let's roll back the internet to dial-up speed and start riding around on horses while we're at it.

We had a ban for 20 years and it was fine. Relax.

It most definitely was not fine. Tens of thousands of people were sentenced to lengthy prison terms in that time because they possessed things that were perfectly legal before the law turned them into criminals.

Cry harder. Abortion was perfectly legal and then the law changed and now it's not in many places.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some good news: The Supreme Court today declined to intervene and block the Illinois ban on assault weapons and high capacity magazines. No noted dissents. (Note: This would have required five votes.)

No surprise waiting for this case and similar ones in other democratic run states to work their way up through the circuit courts. Then they can issue a clear decision on all of them.

Hopefully will include the line - what part of “shall not be infringed” don’t you people get.

Gun owners are not at all being infringed. They are still being allowed fully functional handguns with normal capacity magazines, along with fully functional ordinary hunting rifles with normal capacity magazines that don't look like military weapons.

Sure. Sure. Let's roll back the internet to dial-up speed and start riding around on horses while we're at it.

We had a ban for 20 years and it was fine. Relax.

It most definitely was not fine. Tens of thousands of people were sentenced to lengthy prison terms in that time because they possessed things that were perfectly legal before the law turned them into criminals.

[Citation Needed]

a/k/a that is the most ridiculous piece of hyperbolic fiction in this thread.