9th Circuit Rules There’s No Constitutional Right to Sell Firearms...

[Green Arrow]

You're deflecting, the usual liberal response. If you can't buy then you can't own a working gun. That's stupid. As a liberal, you should be saying the government does have to buy you a gun. If health insurance is a right, and it isn't, then this is a right. It's actually written in the Constitution.

Incorrect. You can make your own totally functioning gun.

[Cletus]

Incorrect. You can make your own totally functioning gun.

What is wrong with you?

I would like to think you are posting the nonsense you are posting for the purpose of stimulating conversation, but I am afraid that would be overly optimistic.

[Green Arrow]

What is wrong with you?

I would like to think you are posting the nonsense you are posting for the purpose of stimulating conversation, but I am afraid that would be overly optimistic.

Is it your belief that you cannot construct a totally functional firearm?

[Chris]

The right it protects is to "keep" and "bear," not "buy" or "sell." Banning the sale of firearms doesn't infringe on your right to keep and bear, there are tons of DIY videos on YouTube that show you how to make your own firearms.

If we cannot purchase arms then we cannot keep and bear them. It does, therefore, infringe on our right. That we could make arms doesn't lessen the infringement.

[Green Arrow]

If we cannot purchase arms then we cannot keep and bear them. It does, therefore, infringe on our right. That we could make arms doesn't lessen the infringement.

If you can make firearms you can keep and bear as many as you care to make. No infringement.

[Chris]

It's an end run around the Second Amendment. The Supreme Ccourt never allows that. DC and Chicago have learned that lesson.Can't outlaw ammunition for legal arms.Can't out wit the constitution.

That's exactly what it is. Let's hope SCOTUS overturns it.

But we have some many instances of end arounds with the commerce clause.

[Chris]

Incorrect. You can make your own totally functioning gun.

It's not incorrect. You just happen to disagree. And with a nonsensical argument.

[Green Arrow]

It's not incorrect. You just happen to disagree. And with a nonsensical argument.

Nonsensical? It's nonsensical to say that if you know how to make a firearm you are limited only by how many you want to make?

[Chris]

If you can make firearms you can keep and bear as many as you care to make. No infringement.

Your semantic game ignores the meaning of infringe. It doesn't mean all or nothing. A synonym is encroachment.

Since the general civilization of mankind, I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations. On a candid examination of history we shall find that turbulence, violence, and abuse of power by the majority trampling on the rights of the minority, have produced factions and commotions, which in republics, have more frequently than any other cause produced despotism. If we go over the whole history of the ancient and modern republics, we shall find their destruction to have generally resulted from those causes.

—James Madison, Speech in the Virginia Ratifying Convention on Control of the Military, June 16, 1788 in: History of the Virginia Federal Convention of 1788, vol. 1, p. 130 (H.B. Grigsby ed. 1890).


One could substitute infringement in Madison's words.

[Chris]

Nonsensical? It's nonsensical to say that if you know how to make a firearm you are limited only by how many you want to make?

A synonym of infringement would be limitation. Thus your argument, in assuming an absolute is indeed nonsensical.