Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: mdittmar

Banning possession of Slide Fires legally purchased would be an unconstitutional ex post facto law.


16 posted on 10/04/2017 7:54:20 PM PDT by tumblindice (America's founding fathers: all armed conservatives)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: tumblindice

“Banning possession of Slide Fires legally purchased would be an unconstitutional ex post facto law.”

In old America that was under that old fashioned Constitution document, that would have been true. New America plays a game of sophistry where the game is that the government can do anything, but you have to make a silly argument that “explains” why its constitutional. They hope to soon abandon that part of the game.


21 posted on 10/04/2017 7:58:47 PM PDT by DesertRhino (Dog is man's best friend, and moslems hate dogs. Add that up.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

To: tumblindice

To say nothing of banning semi-autos previously purchased.


29 posted on 10/04/2017 8:09:18 PM PDT by gundog (Hail to the Chief, bitches.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson