Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

Anti-gun Researcher Refutes His Own Anti-gun Conclusion


Charlie T Waite

Recommended Posts

Anti-gun Researcher Refutes His Own Anti-gun Conclusion

Link to comment

I found it interesting that he said that "permits to purchase" would be a good idea.  In Michigan we had the requirement of getting a permit to purchase from local law authorities.  That requirement was eliminated in approximatley 2013 because the local law authorities were doing nothing more than the required NICS check that is now done at the time of purchase from a legitimate FFL.

 

OO

 

Link to comment

The rights of "the people" as delineated in the Bill of Rights are "unalienable".  And unalienable rights don't require permission from the state to exercise.  Now the only constitutional purchase permit would be in lieu of a NICS check.  States the wave the background check for CCL holders have a form of purchase permit system.  I could see that registration of firearms is constitutional if the State argued that the purpose was for regulating the unorganized militia & had periodic musters.  I hope that now that SCOTUS has a solid 5/4 conservative majority there will be 4 of the 5 that will grant cert for many 2A cases to spank the anti 2A circuit courts for ignoring Scalia's opinion for the majority in Heller vs DC.   Within the next couple of years the legal residents of anti 2A states should get the same rights as those in the rest of the US. 

Link to comment

Interesting that he took the same line as the CDC Oct. 3, 2003 MMWR, that there is no evidence that anti-gun laws do anything to prevent crime or violence, but, even though there was no evidence found to support that claim, they KNOW the evidence is there, give them more money to keep on manipulating the data until it fits their conclusion.

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.