Hypothetical gun laws question

I'm not sure about any others being obsolete, but the justification you've articulated for the second is based upon conditions no longer in evidence. See Zombie's post between yours and mine regarding a revision that might make sense.

Explain to me exactly how a fundamental right can go "obsolete."


I'll wait.

Oh, I think gul's comments pretty clearly demonstrate that the 1st Amendment is obsolete.

Because, in the case of violent felons, they've shown that they are clearly not concerned with the safety of others.

As written in the amendment, and as described by you, the purpose doesn't function given the reality of a standing army.

OK, let's have your suggestion for a "reasonable regulation."

That doesn't address how the basic right of self-defense has gone obsolete.

Actually, in Florida with "Stand your ground" it's been turned on it's head where someone can have a reasonable chance of killing someone needlessly and getting away with it...of course, the fun part is watching SYG backers trying to explain why gang bangers can get away with shooting each other. Talk about unintended consequences.

I will never, ever trade away any right for my name being in a permanent Federal database.

On analysis a registry is pointless--except as a precursor to confiscation.

I would say among the people I work with/family members less than five percent of their total guns are registered. You'd have to be Ned Flanders or Hank Hill obedient to register a gun unless you absolutely had to.

Ummm . . . you're a Marine. Your name is already in several permanent federal databases.

Because no one takes this "paid their debt to society" seriously anymore.

It is more along the lines of "served enough time that the victims moved on with their lives and most people don't care anymore".

And I didn't say that it had. I'm talking about the use of personal firearms to ensure a free state.