Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
You are using the old Black Responsive theme. We have installed a new dark theme for you, called UI.X. This will work better with the new upgrade of our software. You can select it at the bottom of any page.
Was just cleaning out a closet in the house and came across an OEM Ruger pistol case. Thought to myself, I dont remeber buying a Ruger?? Turns out I did. SP101. Its in the back of the gun safe.... Does this mean I offically own too many guns?
Importation
It is my understanding that in order to "import" Title II items, you must have an FFL and pay a Special Occupations Tax (SOT). You can't break it down into pieces either, as you will still be liable for constructive possession. There are additional laws covering suppressors and...
At this time I do not support any gun control laws. Although no guns for violent felons sounds like a good idea, I can not think of a single crime they could commit with them that is not already illegal.
Today's opinion by Justice Scalia - "[T]he Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existance at the time of the founding"
The Court has released the opinion in Sprint Communications v. APCC Services (07-552), on whether the assignment of a claim “for purposes of collection” confers standing on an assignee that litigates only “on behalf of” the assignors. The ruling below, which found for the assignee, is affirmed...
This was originally posted on TFL. Though you kids might be interested in seeing it. I can only assume that California's numbers are so high due to the movie industry.
Alabama
MG: 12,055
Suppressor: 4,905
SBR: 481
SBS: 1,669
AOW: 1,019
Alaska
MG: 1,651
Suppressor: 913
SBR: 127...
Considering the BoR was an enumeration of pre-existing rights endowed by our creator, independent to the government, would it be reasonable to assume that any affirmation of the right by the court would acknowledge a right already in existence? Wouldn’t that have a retroactive effect?
If Heller is decided in favor of the "individual right", what would this mean for anyone whom has been found guilty of prior charges involving firearms?
Would state law still stand in effect for the conviction? Lets say an New Jersey person was convicted for CCW without a permit, would they...
If the Supremes interpreter- "...the right of the people to keep and bear arms...." to mean an individual right, would they then not have to interpreter "....shall not be infringed." as to hold all laws to strict scrutiny?
Am I off track with this?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.