Background checks don't infringe on 2nd amdt.

why would they buy a gun at night in a dark alley, if they could just go to Walmart?

"let's see, I need eggs, ketchup, socks, Glock 9mm, shaving cream, and butter"

 

I ever said it was anything but my opinion. But some do agree with me

 

Before the Nancy Boys got in charge, Sears used to sell guns.

 

great time for criminals.

buy shirts, shoes, and an AK-47

 

Previous to background checks very few guns sold in stores were used in crime. Like now, criminals got their guns the old fashioned way, through theft or a family member.

BTW, you got a problem buying a legal product?

 

i do if they're criminals

 

Funny how Mexico has such restrictive gun laws, one Government owned gun store for the entire Country, and only .22 LR to .380 acp calibers are allowed,
There is no provision for concealed carry in Mexico, only possession in the home.

Yet every Drug Cartel Soldier has Full Auto AK-47s, RPGs, and Grenades, and Crime is off the charts and entire families are shot or beheaded and hung in public.




So, explain how gun control prevents Criminals from obtaining Guns ????

 

Mexico, in many ways, is a failed state.

severe corruption and gangs control much of the territory

 

which is why honest citizens should fit their roofs with quad Fifty machine guns, Surface to Surface Missiles and have Mini Guns on their station wagons and packing Micro Uzi machine pistols or automatic riot shotguns.

 

It's worth infringing on our rights, causing unnecessary delays, and even denials by mistakes?

 

a background checks isn't an infringement.

 

It is an infringement if you want to make it enforceable. Otherwise it is just a useless feel good law so anti gun folks can pat themselves on the back.

 

Indeed it has not. Criminals have demonstrated no difficulty in acquiring firearms, regardless of not being able to pass a background check. Theft and straw purchases are the primary contributors, and you are doing nothing to address their existence. You simply continue going on and on about background checks, despite them being easily subverted, and thus rendered useless. The courts are not prosecuting felons for illegal possession of a firearm. Taken together, there is no legitimate reason to continue maintaining the prohibition on the basis that perhaps it will do some measure of good, when all evidence says that it will not.

 

Yes it is as demontrated multiple times here.

 

sure it is-anything that impedes your exercise of your right is an infringement
and more importantly, the federal government really doesn't have any such power
its one of the great dishonesties in american federal law

the nonsense that the Commerce clause somehow was intended or can really be read to allow federal gun control and also avoid the second amendment's blanket restriction (which being ratified AFTER the commerce clause should trump it)

 

thats nice

 

yeah I suppose when you are unable to contradict the issue, you are relegated to saying"that's nice

what is really sad is that we who are pro rights don't have to hide our motivations. why do you gun restrictionists have such a hard time telling us why you really want to impose harassment on honest gun owners. and don't spew the normal nonsense about "crime control" no one buys that facade any more

 

we want to make the North Korean Communist Zionist Illuminati invasion/takeover of the USA more likely to succceed, by disarming as many white protestant christian heterosexual republican conservative patriots as we can. those who we can't disarm will be put in FEMA camps for reeducation into Mossad Talmudic slaves.

 

We know.

 

You do know you fit the clinical definition for insanity ?

 

would this be an issue with more well regulated militia and posse?

 

No, it is an issue with more well regulated Hotdogs & Mustard on a toasted well regulated Hotdog bun.

 

this bot response has been reported.

 

nothing but diversion?

- - - Updated - - -

you fallacy is duly noted.