On 2/22/2013 7:53 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Thu, 21 Feb 2013 22:00:27 -0500, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:


What are your objections to:
1) universal background checks
CY: That's something called "prior restraint". You can only buy a gun, if
the government approves it. Not the way our Republic works.

Uh, you have a right to vote, too, but you can't vote until you're
registered.

Same thing.

NICS check is
example of prior restraint.

Only if you're restrained -- in other words, if you're a criminal or
an adjudicated loon trying to buy a gun illegally and you're turned
down. If you pass the background check, you aren't restrained at all.
That's why the courts have rejected claims that it's prior restraint.

It was rejected as prior restraint because the application was
automatically approved in three days unless there was cause for denial.

They want to change that, Ed.



It was set up that if you didn't hear back in
three days, the sale went through. Not any more, from what I hear.

In NJ, we typically wait 30 days.

If the
Gov simply stops doing NICS checks, all sales are prevented. Of course, that
would not have prevented the Newtown shooting.


No, all sales would not be prevented.
There would simply be no background checks.


It would have if Lanza's mother had been "prevented."

And, it's not a power
delegated by the Constitution.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessa..._Proper_Clause



2) cradle to grave registration
CY: The only reason for registration, is to make it easier to confiscate.

No, the real reason is to find out who supplied a gun to a criminal.



Fast and furious?
THE GOVERNMENT supplied the guns to criminals.

Has anybody ever heard a rational reason WHY?