you may overlook this doesn't include Rifles; it's those [nasty] concealed handguns that i don't like, in public, in the hands of who knows what sure this isn't likely to happen, any more than we deport tens of millions of illegals, but there's no harm discussing it marc
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit just ruled that the District of Columbia's one gun a month restriction was unconstitutional. If one gun a month won't fly, it's pretty clear that no guns a month won't. The courts have also recognized that bans on handguns are invalid because such guns are the most practical for home defense. The Court of Appeals did uphold the District's ridiculous registration requirements. You have to go down to the police station, a substantial hassle, and get fingerprinted and photographed, to register any gun, and it is illegal to have any gun that is not registered. You also cannot buy a gun outside Dc and bring it here. You must have it shipped to the police headquarters or a FFL who is located there. (There are no gun shops or FFL's in DC.) Hopefully the Supreme Court will overturn these burdensome requirements. Liberals wail about requiring people to have a simple ID to vote but see nothing wrong with deliberately burdening Second Amendment rights.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
More guns are the solution to the gun problem in the same way that more all-you-can-eat buffets and ice cream are the solution to the obesity problem.
one gun a month? only buy one a month? rifles aren't affected under my new proposal i like rifles marc