Fire arms/weapons registrations
Laws governing how firearms are to be stored.
Firearms/weapon class requirement.
Convicted felons and certified crazy people permanently banned from firearms/weapon ownership.
Convicted felons and certified crazy people temporarily banned from firearms/weapon ownership
Age minimum requirement to buy firearms/weapons(please specify)
Firearm magazine size restrictions(please specify)
ban on certain firearms/weapons (please specify)
You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo
Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
And one of the most misunderstood. It was actually an example of what OWH, Jr., considered the most stringent example of the protection of free speech, and in no way was any actual ruling in the case. The case itself was about distributing anti-draft leaflets during WWI.
In a case, by the way, which was later overturned, and the example doesn't even apply anymore. The standard became "inciting imminent lawless action," not just panic.
But even supposing it were the actual holding of the case, and that the case was still controlling law, very few people would even begin to know how to apply it, especially in any realm not having to do with free speech.
"You can't yell 'fire' in a crowded theater!!!!!!" OK, then what? It justifies no specific limitation on any other right.
2001-2008: Dissent is the highest form of patriotism.
2009-2016: Dissent is the highest form of racism.
2017-? (Probably): Dissent is the highest form of misogyny.
What I find really funny about this thread is that the people who support weapons restrictions also support unlimited voting after 18, which does far worse damage than a gun could ever do.
So I'll vote for no restrictions, I have to protect myself from the sheep with "mainstream" beliefs.
I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
So, maybe owning a nuke is a "right" in the most extreme sense of the word, but that doesn't mean society can't - or shouldn't - infringe upon that right.
I'm comfortable with banning people from owning nuclear weapons, even though it would be the most spectacularly redundant law ever, because no individual person has the means to create one, but I would ban it with the caveat that, yes, perhaps we are infringing upon a right. I'm just more comfortable when the decisions we make are based upon honesty instead of some convoluted "intellectual" argument.