11 thoughts on “Quote of the day—samsingh

  1. That’s a bit like claiming that freedom of the press means you’re free to own a printing press but you have no right to paper or ink. Or that freedom of religion means you’re free to have any religion but you’re not allowed to build a church. Only the Saudi dictatorship could appreciate such “liberty”.

    • Or you can have paper and ink but you cannot print words (or letters even). And you certainly cannot print pictures — that would be an assault printer, a thousand words at a time.

    • If Minneapolis Star Tribune v Commissioner, (1983) has any meaning in constitutional analysis, this proposed law is unconstitutional, because the techniques and tools used to interpret one part of the Constitution are applicable to every other part, including the red-headed stepchild of the Constitution, the Second Amendment.
      If a tax on printers ink and newsprint is an unconstitutional limitation on the freedom of the press, then this would be an infringement of the right to keep and bear arms.

  2. Idiots. First, they run afoul of state preemption. Second, they cannot mandate guns be stored in a disabled state. If there is one thing that is indisputable with Heller is that. Unconstitutional to require firearms be mandated to be in a non-functional state. And the ammunition regulation is the trifecta.

Comments are closed.