View Single Post
Old January 26, 2013, 10:53 PM   #134
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 5,045
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alabama Shooter
Then why ask if you don't care? But since I asserted and you did ask how many sources did you want me to cite? I imagine I could throw out there about a dozen if I had the energy. Here is a current one:
Because I was curious. I've seen several polls lately that claimed that a "majority" of people supported X or Y. I was curious as to which you followed, and where you got your numbers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alabama Shooter
If that is your argument than you have completely misunderstood prior restraint.
No, I'm pretty sure that after 3 years of law school and 10 years of practice, I understand prior restraint. The hassle factor is introduced to keep one from going through with the sale. The fact that the hassle doesn't bother you, personally, doesn't mean it's not a hassle. You do understand what "akin" means, right?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alabama Shooter
You were indulging your straw man fantasy about runaway background check fees leading to Armageddon of gun rights. It isn't there.
I'm not the one that used the phrase "Armageddon of gun rights" here. You have said that background checks are free. Perhaps they are, counting from dealer to FFL. Transfers are not always free, though. You don't seem to think that raising costs amounts to a restriction. That's just not correct.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alabama Shooter
I would also feel even much better if you did not sell a gun to my meth head neighbor whom you don't know is a meth head. That is very helpful to me.
That's a little odd. So, you'll "feel better" in spite of the fact that there's no evidence to support either: (1) the notion that such a restriction would even slow down your neighbor from getting a gun; or (2) any claim that I have ever sold a firearm to a prohibited person, or will ever do so?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alabama Shooter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spats McGee
And your solution is to go ahead and let the anti-2A folks have the first move?
You just said background checks are giving the antis the first move. You are lumping everyone together.
That's not quite the same as "assuming that" you are an anti. What I am stating is that you are more than willing to allow the antis to take the first step that they're looking for (universal background checks), in spite of the clear lack of any logical support for such a move.
__________________
A gunfight is not the time to learn new skills.

If you ever have a real need for more than a couple of magazines, your problem is not a shortage of magazines. It's a shortage of people on your side of the argument. -- Art Eatman
Spats McGee is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.04570 seconds with 7 queries