alan
Member
Regarding the confiscation of firearms in N.O., above mentioned by some, it was my impression that this activity was mostly activity by police imports, some from California. My memory or understanding could be faulty though.
Son who has the dirt on the private contractors? Sex slavery, murder, highway robbery, rape, etc.
Hey guys that think Blackwater's mercenaries won't go after U.S. citizens please wake up.
They will do what they are told. They will be given there orders and whatever story is needed to get them to follow their orders.
What is this fascination with Blackwater?
I probably have to go re-read the bill again, but I don't see anything glaring in there stating the "contractors" have to be US Citizens, or a US company. Just a contracted party.
I'm a little more worried about the implications of that.
So if I stick a lump of 238U in a jar of Smuckers, can I get an H&K G36?The contractors mentioned in this bill are for nuclear site security. So they can upgrade from an AR-15 to an M-4
woerm said:The only constitutional grounds for barring a firearms transaction is a felony conviction or adjudication as mentally incompetent.
How so? Inalienable rights are not defined in the U.S. constitution, the supreme law of the land. You have only cited Jefferson's feelings about that and the Declaration of Independence, neither of which are law.I disagree and propose that the 1968 GCA felony disqualification is unconstitutional.
How so? Inalienable rights are not defined
"The Fourteenth Amendment did not empower Congress to invade reserved State rights or give Congress legislative power over private conduct within the States."
"The Fourteenth Amendment targeted only State officers for possible punishment of unjust legislation and enforcement."
"self-evident" Cannot be revoked. "endowed by their Creator" Cannot be revoked. "that among these" Which includes the BOR's. How so is that not defined?
The contractors mentioned in this bill are for nuclear site security.
So they can upgrade from an AR-15 to an M-4
Why couldn't the second amendment read like Washington state's...
"The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself, or the state, shall not be impaired, but nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing individuals or corporations to organize, maintain or employ an armed body of men."