“Ban Assault Weapons NOW initiative” — shot down by Supreme Court
Quote:
Originally Posted by “Dara Kam”
The Florida Supreme Court ruled that a proposed constitutional amendment seeking to ban possession of semi-automatic weapons does not meet legal requirements. The Court noted that the proposed constitutional amendment reads:
- “If an individual registers and attests to lawful possession of an assault weapon, and then lends, gifts, or leaves in a will that assault weapon to a family member or friend, then that family member or friend would [instantly] be in criminal violation of the initiative --- a felony offense.”
An attorney for Ban Assault Weapons NOW, Jon Mills, argued that: “possession is the continual issue.”
Full story:
https://www.mysuncoast.com/2020/06/0...t-weapons-ban/
In 1776, the Second Amendment authorized citizens to own military grade weapons. Why?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Unregistered
In 1776 the English king said to the colonists: "You can trust me because I am the king."
In 1939 Adolf Hitler said to the German people: "You can trust me because I am 'der fuhrer'."
In 2020 Nancy Pelosi said to Democrats: "You can trust me because I'm from the government."
When the Second Amendment was written by the Framers of the U.S. Constitution, it authorized citizens to carry military grade weapons. That raises two important questions:
- Why did the framers of the Constitution authorize citizens to possess military grade weapons? This is the most important question.
- Why does the Democratic Party want to disarm Americans from their AR-15 rifles?
In the midst of last weeks nationwide riots, the Democratic Party presented multiple "demands" to include:
- Ordering officers to "stand down" during the riots.
- A push to "defund police departments."
- A smaller push to disarm officers.
What benefit is there in disarming "law-abiding citizens" from their AR-15 rifles?
