Reply to Thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Chris Harrison" data-source="post: 3723694" data-attributes="member: 45813"><p>LoLl!&nbsp; I enjoy the process of selecting the parts, prepping everything, applying finished and assembly.&nbsp; Then working up a good handload and hopefully shooting little groups up close and ringing steel plates at longer ranges.&nbsp;&nbsp; The problem with legal issues is usually lawyers.&nbsp; When you have to have a long discussion amongst lawyers to debate what the meaning of the word, &quot;is&quot; is, then we need to try something else.&nbsp; I know that it has been long held that no rights are absolute.&nbsp; I get that.&nbsp; But the words &quot;...shall not be infringed.&quot; have meaning and seem to be constantly ignored by the media and many politicians.&nbsp; Like it means something other than what it says.&nbsp; The DC vs Miller case settled the individual rights versus collective rights and Caetano vs Massachusettes settles what is covered.&nbsp; Yet those established specifics keep coming under attack by politicians who do not honor their oath to uphold the constitution.&nbsp; I have to be careful in this area because I find it very frustrating and I shouldn&#039;t allow my frustration to come through when discussing or debating.</p></blockquote><p></p>

[QUOTE="Chris Harrison, post: 3723694, member: 45813"] LoLl! I enjoy the process of selecting the parts, prepping everything, applying finished and assembly. Then working up a good handload and hopefully shooting little groups up close and ringing steel plates at longer ranges. The problem with legal issues is usually lawyers. When you have to have a long discussion amongst lawyers to debate what the meaning of the word, "is" is, then we need to try something else. I know that it has been long held that no rights are absolute. I get that. But the words "...shall not be infringed." have meaning and seem to be constantly ignored by the media and many politicians. Like it means something other than what it says. The DC vs Miller case settled the individual rights versus collective rights and Caetano vs Massachusettes settles what is covered. Yet those established specifics keep coming under attack by politicians who do not honor their oath to uphold the constitution. I have to be careful in this area because I find it very frustrating and I shouldn't allow my frustration to come through when discussing or debating. [/QUOTE]

Verification