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

To: Jim Robinson
Reasonable and sensible restrictions? Restrictions are infringement!

So you think seven year olds, the mentally ill, the severely retarded, and convicted felons ought to be able legally own and carry a firearm? Do you believe a business has the right to prohit anyone carrying a firearm from entering their premises? How about a church or government office?

31 posted on 02/07/2007 2:54:36 PM PST by Dave S
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Dave S

An armed society is a polite society.


44 posted on 02/07/2007 2:57:39 PM PST by Jim Robinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: Dave S
"So you think seven year olds, the mentally ill, the severely retarded, and convicted felons ought to be able legally own and carry a firearm? Do you believe a business has the right to prohit anyone carrying a firearm from entering their premises? How about a church or government office?"

Dave. ...Dave ...Dave, is anybody home?

59 posted on 02/07/2007 3:01:55 PM PST by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: Dave S

If someone is so stupid to carry a firearm into my church, he would likely be shot by the guy in the sound booth -- me.


60 posted on 02/07/2007 3:02:24 PM PST by TommyDale (If we don't put a stop to this global warming, we will all be dead in 10,000 years!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: Dave S

All of the people you've described already own and carry firearms. They enter businesses and churches with them, and cause hella damage. Seems the government offices are, as of now, the only entities that can employ armed security. Doesn't it give ya the creeps thinking that they want to keep it that way?


185 posted on 02/07/2007 3:36:57 PM PST by roamincadillac (wait for the Fort Sumter moment)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: Dave S
So you think seven year olds, the mentally ill, the severely retarded, and convicted felons ought to be able legally own and carry a firearm?

Seven year olds used to have shooting leagues. I was a 10 year old plinkin' away with a .22 in the cub scouts.

Severely retarted people don't understand what a gun is.

Mentally-ill people might should be in custody already.

Convicted felons who have paid their due should be restored to their full rights.

191 posted on 02/07/2007 3:40:25 PM PST by Lazamataz (You are not your mind. You are not your emotions. You are not your pain. All you are is love.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: Dave S
Dave S wrote:

So you think seven year olds, the mentally ill, the severely retarded, and convicted felons ought to be able legally own and carry a firearm? Do you believe a business has the right to prohit anyone carrying a firearm from entering their premises? How about a church or government office?

Our right to carry arms is the 'Law of the Land". -- So yes, businessmen are obligated to support & defend the 2nd, as is everyone that lives & works in the USA.

And yes - even children, the mentally ill, the severely retarded, and convicted felons ought to be able legally own and carry those arms that their guardians & protectors deem appropriate.

193 posted on 02/07/2007 3:41:05 PM PST by tpaine (" My most important function on the Supreme Court is to tell the majority to take a walk." -Scalia <)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: Dave S

Those are completely disingenuous arguments, fella.


364 posted on 02/07/2007 4:37:39 PM PST by Alberta's Child (Can money pay for all the days I lived awake but half asleep?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: Dave S; TommyDale; spunkets; Jim Robinson; Lazamataz; roamincadillac; tpaine; Alberta's Child
So Dave....you've several replies.

Have you been muzzled?

418 posted on 02/07/2007 4:55:39 PM PST by Osage Orange ("The man who most vividly realizes a difficulty is the man most likely to overcome it.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: Dave S

"...Shall not be infringed" means JUST THAT. Before GCA '68, you got ALL your rights back after you got out of the pen (except the right to vote, IIRC). It was GCA '68 that kept felons from getting gun rights back. There's no good reason for that. Once someone has served their entire sentence they still have their basic rights, INCLUDING the right to self-defense. If you can't trust them not to be criminals, KEEP THEM LOCKED UP until they learn better. No parole, no probation for violent crimes, OK? ELIMINATE ALL UNCONSTITUTIONAL Victim disarmament laws (which means ALL of them, at ALL levels). RKBA is UNCONDITIONAL excepting ONLY when you are actually serving your time for your crime. That can be the ONLY condition that meets Constitutional muster.

The only POSSIBLE issue that the States (NOT FedGov) can pursue is the improper USE of a weapon, no matter what it is. Ownership and possession of ANY weapon (excepting, IMO, nukes and chemical/biological weapons) is covered by the Second.


606 posted on 02/07/2007 6:05:23 PM PST by dcwusmc (We need to make government so small that it can be drowned in a bathtub.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: Dave S

I'm not Jim, but here are MY answers to your simplistic and overly broad questions.

"1. So you think seven year olds, 2. the mentally ill, 3. the severely retarded, and 4. convicted felons ought to be able legally own and carry a firearm? 5.Do you believe a business has the right to prohibit anyone carrying a firearm from entering their premises? How about a 6. church or 7. government office?"

1. I got my first .22 at eight years of age, never committed any crime or vandalism with it. So if the kid is mature and responsible they can have all the guns they want.
At exactly what age do you grant children the right to defend themselves?
We had a kid locally who saved his mother, sister, and himself from probable death at the hands of a stalker who was attempting to beat his mother to death, only hours after the assailant was released from jail.
The kid was about nine as I recall, he killed the thug with a .22 rifle, after tackling him did not work.

2. Can you define your terms more narrowly? Some people might be technically "mentally Ill" who are actually quite sane and responsible. Raving lunatics clearly no, but your term is imprecise.

3. Severely retarded? Again, your question is unclear. Retarded only means behind the curve for "normal" mental development.
A thirty year old with the mental skills of a twelve year old could probably be trusted with arms if being retarded is their only problem.

4. Convicted Felons? Convicted of WHAT felony?
"Felony" now covers so many things that it is a wonder anyone has escaped the label!
Do all felons lose their right to defend themselves, or their families?
Is it OK to assault a felon's wife or children at will?
Are all felons marked for assault at the whim of anyone who feels like attacking them?
Your question is too broad.

5. Generally, NO! Such prohibitions only serve to make that business a "Target rich environment", leaving the workers defenseless when some nut does decide to commit mayhem.

6. Same as 5.

7. Generally the same as 5, and even then lockers should be available for checking your gun until you leave, as is done in Arizona.


922 posted on 02/07/2007 11:59:08 PM PST by Richard-SIA ("The natural progress of things is for government to gain ground and for liberty to yield" JEFFERSON)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: Dave S
So you think seven year olds, the mentally ill, the severely retarded, and convicted felons ought to be able legally own and carry a firearm?

Oh yeah, that's what this argument is about. (Eyes roll) You must be fun in a debate.

1,001 posted on 02/08/2007 6:15:46 AM PST by aberaussie (Ignorance has a cost.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: Dave S
So you think seven year olds, the mentally ill, the severely retarded, and convicted felons ought to be able legally own and carry a firearm?

I'll play along: yes.

Do you believe a business has the right to prohit anyone carrying a firearm from entering their premises?

Yes. It is private property.

How about a church or government office?

Church is private property. See above. Government office is not private property. Answer: no.

1,014 posted on 02/08/2007 6:26:12 AM PST by Publius Valerius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | 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