NZ BANS ASSAULT WEAPONS

[mandm84]

Spot on schlomo ! The NRA owns the Republicans in Congress and the White House , so as usual nothing will get done to stop the mass carnage in OUR schools especially.

No Civilan has a logical reason to carry a 50 round Military Style Assault Rifle - NONE !!

[TxGrandpa2]

---

@ChasKy53 wrote:

---

---

Do you really think that trump supporters would stand up against him for declaring a national emergency and banning certain weapons?  So far they have accepted anything he does.

---

I wouldn't know, so why don't you ask them? For myself, I have stated what the Constitution says.

[NOTHAPPENING]

---

@ChasKy53 wrote:

---

@TxGrandpa2 wrote:

The  government has banned assault weapons by decree, but the legislation to do so will follow next month?

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/03/20/new-zealand-bans-military-assault-rifles-after...

"New Zealand is banning all assault rifles, high-capacity magazines and military-style semi-automatic rifles in response to the nation's deadliest massacre in history, the country's prime minister announced Thursday.

"Jacinda Ardern said the ban goes into effect immediately and would be followed by legislation next month. New Zealand's citizens should make arrangements to turn in weapons banned under the new laws, Ardern told the nation in a live television announcement."

If that was done by declaring a 'national emergency' in this country how loud would be the uproar, calling the President a dictator?

---

Do you really think that trump supporters would stand up against him for declaring a national emergency and banning certain weapons?  So far they have accepted anything he does.

---

The question begs, if Trump banned any weapons (under declaration of emergency), would any leftists or Antifa riot?

[ChasKy53]

---

@TxGrandpa2 wrote:

The  government has banned assault weapons by decree, but the legislation to do so will follow next month?

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/03/20/new-zealand-bans-military-assault-rifles-after...

"New Zealand is banning all assault rifles, high-capacity magazines and military-style semi-automatic rifles in response to the nation's deadliest massacre in history, the country's prime minister announced Thursday.

"Jacinda Ardern said the ban goes into effect immediately and would be followed by legislation next month. New Zealand's citizens should make arrangements to turn in weapons banned under the new laws, Ardern told the nation in a live television announcement."

If that was done by declaring a 'national emergency' in this country how loud would be the uproar, calling the President a dictator?

---

Do you really think that trump supporters would stand up against him for declaring a national emergency and banning certain weapons?  So far they have accepted anything he does.

[TxGrandpa2]

---

@Richva wrote:

---

@NOTHAPPENING wrote:

---

@Richva wrote:

The original intent of the founders was that there be no restriction on the ownership of muzzle loading rifles. 

---

Your assumption??????

---

That if the founders had access to the firearms of today, the Constitution would be much different.  For one thing, they would have required a weekend of training a month and two weeks a year. 

---

No kidding.  Did they tell you that or is it an assumption on your part.  I would think that based on their thinking that they would lean more towards individual freedoms.

[NOTHAPPENING]

---

@Richva wrote:

---

@NOTHAPPENING wrote:

---

@Richva wrote:

The original intent of the founders was that there be no restriction on the ownership of muzzle loading rifles. 

---

Your assumption??????

---

That if the founders had access to the firearms of today, the Constitution would be much different.  For one thing, they would have required a weekend of training a month and two weeks a year. 

---

So your answer is: "it was my assumption"!

[TxGrandpa2]

---

@Richva wrote:

The original intent of the founders was that there be no restriction on the ownership of muzzle loading rifles. 

---

"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."  Where is 'muzzle loading rifles' mentioned in that quote of the Second Amendment?

In any event there is no such thing as a "muzzle loading rifle".  A muzzle loading firearm, or rather a musket,  is a smooth bored long barreled  weapon intended for firing a single projectile.  A rifle has a rifled barrel.

Besides your comment has no bearing on the constitutional amendment and is only an opinion.

[Richva]

---

@NOTHAPPENING wrote:

---

@Richva wrote:

The original intent of the founders was that there be no restriction on the ownership of muzzle loading rifles. 

---

Your assumption??????

---

That if the founders had access to the firearms of today, the Constitution would be much different.  For one thing, they would have required a weekend of training a month and two weeks a year. 

[NOTHAPPENING]

---

@Richva wrote:

The original intent of the founders was that there be no restriction on the ownership of muzzle loading rifles. 

---

Your assumption??????

[Richva]

The original intent of the founders was that there be no restriction on the ownership of muzzle loading rifles.