"Your argument is more academic than real, since no court in the land is going to agree that all firearm laws are unconstitutional."
The topic was licencing, not all firearms laws. Wake up and pay attention!
Re: an emancipated adult
"First, a 6 year old is a person. If not, then no constitutional issue exists with respect to a fetus. ...
Ditto on the wakeup!
"Because there are thousands of convicted murderers on the streets who have served their time. It was a real question."
Fine. Punishment for crimes can be instituted by the legislature. That includes Congress. It can't be imposed retroactively, which the '68 GCA and the Lautenberg amend did.
"I can assume from that answer that guns should be allowed on planes if the captain has no objections. "
No need to assume. That's what my statement means.
"In other words, the captain, not the government makes these decisions?"
That's correct. The captain only has the planes owner to answer to in this matter.
"The point was that reasonable curbs exist on the exercise of the 2d Amendment. They are only ridiculous to you because you could not adequately address them."
The questions were answered more than adequately. You failed to display any knowledge, or understanding of the concept of emancipation. You posed the first question as if a six y/o should really be allowed to keep and bear any arms as he saw fit. That's ridiculous! The other questions were a bit less so.
The topic was licencing, not all firearms laws. Wake up and pay attention!
I believe you stated that all licensing laws are unconstitutional because the right to bear arms is a right, not a privilege. If so, then all other restrictions are also unconstitutional...unless governments do have the power to reasonably ensure the protection of society by some regulation. If so, then your argument that all licenses are unconstitutional is merely academic.
"First, a 6 year old is a person. If not, then no constitutional issue exists with respect to a fetus. ... Ditto on the wakeup!
Yes, if you cannot effectively argue your point, try the wakeup issue.
It can't be imposed retroactively, which the '68 GCA and the Lautenberg amend did.
And that has what to do with what we are discussing?
"I can assume from that answer that guns should be allowed on planes if the captain has no objections. " No need to assume. That's what my statement means.
Thank God most Americans and the government do not agree with that. I can just see all the Muslim pilots moving up in the airline industry who at least won't have to use boxcutters next time. But it will save all those extra costs associated with TSA.
The questions were answered more than adequately. You failed to display any knowledge, or understanding of the concept of emancipation.
Well, you'll excuse me if I don't look to you for guidance on the Constitution. You keep your emancipation; I'll keep my safe and secure society.
You posed the first question as if a six y/o should really be allowed to keep and bear any arms as he saw fit. That's ridiculous! The other questions were a bit less so.
You posed the 2d Amendment as if it were a right completely unfettered. The 6 year old example was merely to point out that of course the 2d Amendment can have restrictions which are reasonable and prudent. And no, weapons should not be allowed on public transportation systems; and no, felons should not be permitted to carry weapons; and yes, some licensing requirements that ensure only law abiding citizens have firearms are not only prudent, but constitutional.