To: SJSAMPLE
I'd be curious as to the opinion of FR's 2nd amendment absolutists who feel anyone should be able to own any military weapon as long as they can afford one.
Ths decision specifically denies that right.
9 posted on
06/26/2008 11:25:50 AM PDT by
stravinskyrules
(Why is it that whenever I hear a piece of music I don't like, it's always by Villa-Lobos?)
To: stravinskyrules
It is only a small step in the right direction - but its big change from the normal course of things.
19 posted on
06/26/2008 11:46:08 AM PDT by
Little Ray
(I'm a Conservative. But I can vote for John McCain. If I have to. I guess.)
To: stravinskyrules
Myself, and most people I know draw the line at weapons not possessed by the infantryman.
1. Assault Rifles (with automatic fire capability): Yes.
2. Belt fed machineguns: Yes.
.....
....
...
..
.
99. Nuclear Weapons: No.
28 posted on
06/26/2008 12:19:28 PM PDT by
SJSAMPLE
To: stravinskyrules
Ths decision specifically denies that right. I don't see that at all. It specifically says a class of weapons cannot be banned.
29 posted on
06/26/2008 12:26:00 PM PDT by
beltfed308
(Heller: The defining moment of our Republic)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson