[dcwusmc]

Since the ICC was intended SOLELY to keep the states trading fairly with each other, not to give FedGov an opening to ban whatever it felt like and since prohibiting possession of anything based on what someone MIGHT do with it is prior restraint, which is outlawed, I still fail to see where you have a Constitutional leg to stand on. Your constant posting of this "finding" does nothing for your case and makes you look like a grinning, posturing jacka$$, like any other 'Rat control freak.

[Roscoe]

...since prohibiting possession of anything based on what someone MIGHT do with it is prior restraint, which is outlawed

False. Nonsense.

[secretagent]

Can't say I disagree with your last post to Roscoe until you got to this part: ...makes you look like a grinning, posturing jacka$$, like any other 'Rat control freak.

I see no point to the insults, even if the "other side" started it.