Quote:
Originally Posted by Strel
You have to draw the line somewhere, and I fully agree that line should be based on the best science available.
|
The line should be at the door of prisons & mental hospitals.
Quote:
|
The government can, however, draw such lines. No right is absolute. The state can regulate free speech under certain circumstances and in the presence of a compelling state interest - like public safety, for example.
|
Horse pucky. Show me a single right besides RKBA that requires a backround check & permit to excercise it. A truly comprable thing would be limitations on where & when you could shoot NOT where & when you could have a gun. You can bring your mouth to a theater, just cant scream "FIRE", no mouth permit is required & no backround check either.
Quote:
|
It follows then that the government can put reasonable restrictions on firearms for public safety reasons. Given that we are dealing with an express constitutional right, those reasons have to be very good indeed and the restrictions have to be the minimum necessary to accomplish the compelling interest.
|
Ok, what constitutes "reasonable" To me reasonable means not allowing guns for inmates & those in mental hospitals. The rest of us should be able to buy a gun at will & carry it where we see fit. The reason they preserved the right in the first place was "compelling interest" There is no compelling interest in todays gun laws. If anything they defy logic. Crime & gun crime in particular has skyrocketed with gun control. 100 years ago gun crime was a fraction of what we see today yet anybody could own & carry a gun.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
