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

To: Restorer
"Although attempts to ban older "unsafe" guns should be resisted, I see no reason why we should knee-jerk reject the very idea of making guns safer."

Amendment V

nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.

JEREMIAH W. (JAY) NIXON, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MISSOURI, et al., PETITIONERS v. SHRINK MISSOURI GOVERNMENT PAC et al. ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT [January 24, 2000]

Justice Stevens

"I make one simple point. Money is property;"

Make sure the taxpayer "compensates" gun makers for "taking" their property (money) for the public use of "safety," then we can start the debate of mandated safety features.

37 posted on 11/13/2004 2:55:37 PM PST by tahiti
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]


To: tahiti

Your point would make sense if it were applied equally to cars, bicycles, ladders, airplanes and every other item of manufacture which has been lawyered to death. Since this theory has not been applied in this way, it is difficult to develop a rationale as a result of which firearms are exempt from the standards applied to all other products.


128 posted on 11/13/2004 7:38:08 PM PST by Restorer (Europe is heavily armed, but only with envy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | 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