Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 06/16/2014 9:51:05 AM PDT by aimhigh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-35 next last
To: aimhigh

I will not comply.


2 posted on 06/16/2014 9:52:53 AM PDT by demshateGod (The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: aimhigh

I thought you already had to declare that you were not buying a firearm for someone else on the form you fill out at the gun store.


3 posted on 06/16/2014 9:53:31 AM PDT by ReaganÜberAlles (Remember, you can't spell "progressive" without "SS".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: aimhigh
THREE FELONIES A DAY: How the Feds Target the Innocent
4 posted on 06/16/2014 9:53:44 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum ("The more numerous the laws, the more corrupt the government." --Tacitus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: aimhigh; Lurking Libertarian; Perdogg; JDW11235; Clairity; Spacetrucker; Art in Idaho; GregNH; ...

FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.

5 posted on 06/16/2014 9:53:48 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (There are those that break and bend. I'm the other kind. ~Steve Earle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: aimhigh

Guess they forgot about “shall not be infringed”.


6 posted on 06/16/2014 9:54:45 AM PDT by Colonel_Flagg ("Compromise" means you've already decided you lost.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: aimhigh

Which way did Roberts rule?


7 posted on 06/16/2014 9:54:55 AM PDT by GraceG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: aimhigh

So I interpret this as no more giving guns as a gift.


8 posted on 06/16/2014 9:56:08 AM PDT by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: aimhigh; All
One more reason to move to Maine and help us secede. From the proposed Constitution that will be voted on at the secession vote on June 12, 2018:

Section 6. The Militia and the standing army of 1,000. So as to insure and guarantee the rights guaranteed in this Constitution, every natural born male in the Republic of Maine, upon reaching the age of 18 years from conception through age 67 years from conception, has, as a member of the Militia, the obligation to keep and bear arms for the common defense, for his and his families protection, to defend against this government or any government in the future from becoming oppressive, tyrannical, or in any other way obnoxious to freedom, and to secure the rights written in this Constitution. This obligation shall never be questioned. No law shall be passed that restricts this obligation, except for time in a local jail, county jail or Maine Republic prison. No law shall be passed, test given, or fee assessed to any citizen of the Republic of Maine, age 18 from the age of conception, both male and female, that would restrict in any way that citizens right to be armed either concealed or open. Males who are found to be or confess to being homosexuals are refused entry and from serving in either the Militia or the standing army. Males over the age of 67 may be voluntary members of the Militia with the full rights of Militia members. Natural born males between the age of 16 years from conception to 18 years from conception may volunteer for Militia service with the written permission of parents or guardians. The standing army of 1,000 shall be drawn from the Militia by the commander of the Militia and is under the command of the commander of the Militia who is appointed by and reports directly to the President.


9 posted on 06/16/2014 9:56:18 AM PDT by The_Republic_Of_Maine (Be kept informed on Maine's secession, sign up at freemaine@hushmail.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: aimhigh

WTF - I just bought my son his first gun to give him on his birthday, I committed a felony over a stupid Mossberg 500 youth model???????


10 posted on 06/16/2014 9:56:39 AM PDT by Abathar (Proudly posting without reading the article carefully since 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: aimhigh
the law applied to a Virginia man who bought a gun with the intention of transferring it to a relative

And they knew this how?

Either they are mind readers, or the fellow was... um... unwise, in stating so.

So firearms for Christmas is out?

12 posted on 06/16/2014 9:56:42 AM PDT by grobdriver (Where is Wilson Blair when you need him?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: aimhigh

So! You cannot purchase a firearm as a gift.


15 posted on 06/16/2014 9:57:18 AM PDT by reg45 (Barack 0bama: Implementing class warfare by having no class.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: aimhigh

Does this mean we can no longer ‘gift’ a firearm to someone who is legally permitted to own a firearm without possibly being prosecuted?


18 posted on 06/16/2014 9:58:12 AM PDT by KoRn (Department of Homeland Security, Certified - "Right Wing Extremist")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: aimhigh

Justice Kagan essentially says that gun registration is Constitutional and 4 other justices agreed with her. Not good.


24 posted on 06/16/2014 10:00:53 AM PDT by centurion316
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: aimhigh

How do you prove INTENT? And where is the constitutional authority? I will not comply.


25 posted on 06/16/2014 10:01:49 AM PDT by Salvavida (The restoration of the U.S.A. starts with filling the pews at every Bible-believing church.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: aimhigh
A "straw purchase" is usually connoted as a purchase for resale, not for a gift. Were it interpreted the latter way no giving of firearms would be legal, even that which is explicitly allowed by current law.

I'll be waiting for government clarification before I give any firearms away. Not.

27 posted on 06/16/2014 10:02:21 AM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: aimhigh
This is just more proof we have our Second Amendment rights only as long as five of nine Supreme Court Justices agree we have these rights.
29 posted on 06/16/2014 10:04:55 AM PDT by DJ Taylor (Once again our country is at war,and once again the Democrats have sided with our enemy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: aimhigh

How about the legality of a straw government?


30 posted on 06/16/2014 10:05:31 AM PDT by Psalm 144 (Happier than a Svoboda skinhead with a free armband.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: aimhigh

Could have some weight if “Fast and Furious” felons ever get prosecuted.


36 posted on 06/16/2014 10:07:53 AM PDT by Bloody Sam Roberts (Only Liberals can look at an amendment that says "shall not be infringed" and see blank parchment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: All

the breakdown:

#############

Writing for the majority, Justice Elena Kagan said the federal government’s elaborate system of background checks and record-keeping requirements help law enforcement investigate crimes by tracing guns to their buyers. Those provisions would mean little, she said, if a would-be gun buyer could evade them by simply getting another person to buy the gun and fill out the paperwork.

Kagan’s opinion was joined by Justice Anthony Kennedy, who is often considered the court’s swing vote, as well as liberal Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor.

In dissent, Justice Antonin Scalia said the language of the law does not support making it a crime for one lawful gun owner to buy a gun for another lawful gun owner. He was joined by the court’s other conservatives — Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.


39 posted on 06/16/2014 10:10:36 AM PDT by stevie_d_64 (Will work for a new Kidney...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: aimhigh

Another great ruling by that so called right wing majority the libs are always whining about. Speaking of straw men.

When will people realize that they will never get their grievances redressed in the US court system. The federal courts are here to assist and benefit the government, not the citizens.


42 posted on 06/16/2014 10:12:29 AM PDT by ChildOfThe60s ((If you can remember the 60s.....you weren't really there)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-35 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson