Even without that, any contradiction between purchasing a firearm during our current time and any future laws against the spreading and empowering the capability to kill by them is limited to how the type of purchased weapon and the intended use for which it was purchased can fit any future restrictions by such laws. For example, the basic shotgun can be required to be much heavier than what it is and be the size of a washing machine and it can still be sufficient for the home defense purpose for which it was purchased. It can also be required to be made inoperable outside a very limited range of fixed location physical or wireless connection and it can still be sufficient for that purpose.
Friday, March 27, 2015
Thursday, March 26, 2015
A little clarification 2
Although I am not responsible for reckless or careless understanding to my position, here is what I said in the past and it shows how what I wrote in the post below is not something new to my position.
Wednesday, March 25, 2015
A little clarification
I mentioned this when I was posting in a discussion board. My general position regarding firearms ownership is about the system not the individual. It generally has nothing to do with the individual choosing to have or not have a firearm as long as the law still allows that.
In addition, for my second amendment interpretation argument, which I have been concentrating on for sometime, I could even be the most believer in having laws allowing such ownership but still believe that the second amendment does not impose that.