This is a placeholder for now because I have not had ads on this blog for years. In case I ever start up again, this will be the policy in effect:
The FTC has some fool nonsense rules about ads on blogs or some such and presumes authority over the First Amendment to compel the unfunded mandate that we who earn ad revenues make some kind of disclosure so you don't think we're getting paid to say nice things about people or God knows what, meaning they must think you're stupid, too. I have had a few ads on this site in the past and may do so again if I think it's worth a try. Combined, I probably couldn't buy a box of good cigars each year, let alone a bottle of George T. Stagg, and that is somehow supposed to compromise my morality to force me to say nice things about products and services I don't mean simply in exchange for filthy lucre. If you believe that, leave now--you're not smart enough to be here. Bottom line, aside from welcoming a sponsor, I will do no posts related to their products or services, or reviews of what they offer.
About "The Only Ones"
The purpose of this feature has never been to bash cops. The only reason I do this is to amass a credible body of evidence to present when those who would deny our right to keep and bear arms use the argument that only government enforcers are professional and trained enough to do so safely and responsibly. And it's also used to illustrate when those of official status, rank or privilege, both in law enforcement and in some other government position, get special breaks not available to we commoners, particularly (but not exclusively) when they're involved in gun-related incidents.
Comment House Rules
Keep them on topic. No spam. No threats against anyone except me. Do not feed trolls--I'll take out the trash. Try to keep it clean. I'm the final arbiter. If you don't like the rules, start your own damn blog.
Link Policy
WarOnGuns reciprocates links with liberty-oriented sites promoting the right to keep and bear arms for all peaceable individuals. If you have linked to me and don't see your site below, it's probably just because I haven't noticed it yet. Shoot me an email via the "Contact Form" (see above in this sidebar) if you want to fix that.
As a general rule I remove links for blogs that have been inactive for over one year.
Uh,isn't the private ownership of machine guns legal,as long as you pay the tax and pass the background check,um,like already? The Brady Bags remind me of what Pa usta say,"Boy,when them whiners get wound up in Washington, I feel like 5 pounds of @#!* in a 2 pound can".
I believe it would go beyond that, Sean--what is it, we can't get any mg's manufactured after 1986 by federal law--so the $200 tax is the most minor economic consideration (albeit a MAJOR Constitutional one) as this drives the prices of the limited stock of pre-'86 guns through the roof...
Somebody jump in if I misstated things--this is off the top of my head.
Hi, David. My friend found this on Alito's opinion:
U.S. v. Rybar, 103 F.3d 273 (3rd. Cir. 1996)
If you actually read that you would know that he, in fact, WOULD support a ban had the government gave evidence to show that the "intrastate possession of firearms substantially affects interstate commerce". In fact, he writes "That responsibility, it seems to me, requires us to invalidate the statutory provision at issue here in its present form. This would not preclude adequate regulation of the private possession of machine guns." AND "I would view this case differently if Congress as a whole or even one of the responsible congressional committees had made a finding that intrastate machine gun possession, by facilitating the commission of certain crimes, has a substantial effect on interstate commerce."
So, it appears as if he's just another shill for the neo-conservatives at this point. We don't know if he's truly pro-gun yet. Please spread the word, as many gunnies don't know the whole truth so far.
3 comments:
Uh,isn't the private ownership of machine guns legal,as long as you pay the tax and pass the background check,um,like already? The Brady Bags remind me of what Pa usta say,"Boy,when them whiners get wound up in Washington, I feel like 5 pounds of @#!* in a 2 pound can".
I believe it would go beyond that, Sean--what is it, we can't get any mg's manufactured after 1986 by federal law--so the $200 tax is the most minor economic consideration (albeit a MAJOR Constitutional one) as this drives the prices of the limited stock of pre-'86 guns through the roof...
Somebody jump in if I misstated things--this is off the top of my head.
Hi, David. My friend found this on Alito's opinion:
U.S. v. Rybar, 103 F.3d 273 (3rd. Cir. 1996)
If you actually read that you would know that he, in fact, WOULD support a ban had the government gave evidence to show that the "intrastate possession of firearms substantially affects interstate commerce". In fact, he writes "That responsibility, it seems to me, requires us to invalidate the statutory provision at issue here in its present form. This would not preclude adequate regulation of the private possession of machine guns." AND "I would view this case differently if Congress as a whole or even one of the responsible congressional committees had made a finding that intrastate machine gun possession, by facilitating the commission of certain crimes, has a substantial effect on interstate commerce."
So, it appears as if he's just another shill for the neo-conservatives at this point. We don't know if he's truly pro-gun yet. Please spread the word, as many gunnies don't know the whole truth so far.
Post a Comment