If that were an absolute, as you state, then there would "not" be a system in place to allow people that "you" define fit within those catagories a way to petition to have "certain" rights restored to them "by the state"...Everytime I hear or see the word "reasonable" I see "infringement"...wjmphoto wrote:Gun ownership is no different as it is a right that citizens should posses except under extraordinary circumstances. Felons and people with mental health issues reasonably fall under those extraordinary circumstances that should preclude one from being able to own a firearm.
Bullbutter...These have everything to do with the overall issue of gun-control...And the more people roll over and accept "reasonable infringements" it has been a real battle to restore for certain peoples sensibilities, the "inalienable" right to keep and bear arms...Thats pretty much all of us...The balance of gun control regulations that have been enacted have nothing to do with these 2 limitations.
And no law written on paper to address the issue has ever stopped a determined person (deranged or not) from ever committing a crime with a firearm...So to me, I find no use for any of them other than they being a springboard for further efforts to make it difficult if not discouraging to maintain my right to defend myself with whatever means and morals I deem necessary...
Give me 10 minutes, and I can go buy pretty much any firearm I want to from people who don't give a flip about who buys them...That is a fact...And people who fit your definition know this as well...And no law will ever reduce or eliminate this market...Not one bit...
So the solution is not the effort to create laws, that on paper, "say" it is illegal, etc etc etc...Thats band-aid politics...Gives a few people warm and fuzzies...
I'm going hop off this soapbox for a while and read a little more of your stuff...I hope to be able to see and understand a little deeper into your positions...Not that my opinion matters a hill of beans...