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

To: mbraynard

Right. Well, possibly right. Ditto for bans on arms not metal detectable. This is the solicitor’s concern.


Such guns DO NOT EXIST.

The solicitor lumped the issue of machine guns in lawful private hands with prohibiting guns for felons. Lots of crap not at issue and never disputed, just to muddy the waters.


141 posted on 01/21/2008 12:07:47 PM PST by Atlas Sneezed ("We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts; I support them, I won't chip away at them" -Mitt Romney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies ]


To: Beelzebubba
Such guns DO NOT EXIST.

Right. Because they are banned.

145 posted on 01/21/2008 1:06:26 PM PST by mbraynard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies ]

To: Beelzebubba
Lots of crap not at issue and never disputed, just to muddy the waters.

That's what you are missing. It is at issue - at least the solicitor makes the case that it does - because of how broadly the appeals court decided the case.

147 posted on 01/21/2008 1:11:11 PM PST by mbraynard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | 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