https://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?201+sum+SB69 This is good news. Such a law reduces gun trafficking and is constitutionally acceptable according to the Supreme Court. You don't need to buy handguns in bulk to defend yourself. There isn't any legitimate reason at all to oppose the law. Everyone on both sides of the debate should support it.
What if the law limited handgun purchases to one a year? Would that be a goal? Can you cite the case where this is upheld as Constitutional? It certainly will increase the numbers of CCW holders in Virginia, so it's got that going for it.
First, the united state supreme court has never stated that firearm-rationing schemes were constitutionally acceptable. Second, Such a proposal will not serve to prevent so much as a single crime from occurring. The state of Virginia attempted such an approach, and it was found to be a complete failure. Attempting a confirmed failure a second time will not yield success, it will simply be another failure. Third, the law allows for those who have concealed carry permits to purchase as many firearms as they wish, as often as they wish. How well is that going to work out?
Another attack on good people while ignoring the real issue. Gangs can get as many guns as they want.
Yes, but antigun zealots ignore the truth, preferring to live in a alternate world where they feel safer by restricting the rights of others.
I disagree about there being no legitimate reason to oppose it, but I also am not worked up about it.
one handgun per month is a rational and sensible law. it will reduce the flow of guns to criminals. this should become a nationwide mandate
Except for the fact that it is not. Except for the fact that it will not. The state of California is evidence of such. The ATF has confirmed that even the state of California cannot make such a policy work, even with the universal registration of every firearm within the state. Therefore the policy is a failure, and there is no sense in attempting to implement it within states that have no firearms registration program.
There is no basis by which firearm rationing is either rational, or sensible. Prove such to be the case.
Except for the fact that no such claim has actually been made on the part of myself. Rather it was a challenge to yourself to demonstrate the legitimacy of the claims that are being presented on the part of yourself, to demonstrate they are not merely wild claims with no basis in reality.
Again, no such claim has been made on the part of myself. It is yourself, and only yourself, engaged in telling others what their constitutional rights do and do not entail. Thus the burden of proof is upon yourself, and yourself exclusively, to prove either where such beliefs actually come from, or confirm that they are actually being made up by yourself with no basis in reality.
Get to proving the legal basis for the claim that was made on the part of yourself, or admit to making it up with no basis in fact.
One who does not make a claim is under no obligation to go about proving anything. Yet the claim was made by yourself, and yourself exclusively. Therefore the burden of proof is on the part of yourself exclusively. Again. Get to proving the legal basis for the claim that was made on the part of yourself, or admit to making it up with no basis in fact. It is either one or the other.
Pray tell, exactly which claim has been made on the part of myself in this discussion that is in need of actually being proven?
Are your PMs unabled? I'd like to ask a question between us, something a Florida native may have insight on.
Speaking as a native Virginian this is small potatoes compared to what Governor 'Blackface" Northam and his merry band of Democrats in the legislature have in store for us come 2021. To paraphrase an old Mexican saying, " Poor Virginia, so far from God, so close to DC.".
Then perhaps the people of the state of Virginia should take a cue from the nation of Mexico in how it would deal with corrupt politicians. What more do they truly have to lose?
