Posted on 04/12/2018 7:51:19 AM PDT by Simon Green
He can’t support something he doesn’t understand. However, I assume he’s smart, so he does understand it, and as such he’s just chosen to write his own version of 2A
maybe you didn’t notice, but someone decided 18 year olds can be in the military, and therefore be able to handle a weapon. What you’re saying is that is not true...so someone’s got it all wrong. How can this conflict be allowed to exist without being challenged?
Left hand says “gun at 18” Right hand says “must be 21”
does this make sense to you?
“And removing guns from someone who is accused of domestic assault is reasonable until they get their day in court.”
You mean kind of like when my Ex wanted all the Saving account, 1/2 of my 401Ks (she made more money then me and had larger 401K balances), AND she wanted me to remorgage the house (which I was going to thankfully get to keep) and take out another 40K to give to her just because ... or else ... she was going to file a restraining order for the fun of it (with no basis in fact). Then I would have lost all my firearms and been kicked out of my home.
See how these “new” laws can easily be abused.
My Ex new she had me by the short and curlies because I owned firearms.
Now this new law will be abused by anyone who doesn’t like you for what ever reason. And ALL judges will gladly grant the order to remove firearms from any person for whatever reason.
And if you did get your firearms back after some long time frame, I can guarantee you they will be damaged beyond repair (oops, sorry they fell over in the evidence room).
There is no reasonableness in these new laws ... period.
Hey, that’s basically what happened to me. And I got all my guns back. This was 20 years ago, though.
you are spot on
I went through an ugly divorce too. She allowed her family to come into my house and take all my guns and hide them from me. They did so because she had briefed them on her intentions to steal everything I owned and was afraid I might get angry and take some sort of action with a gun. Of course that would never have happened...after all the ammo is worth much more than her :-)
Everytime you hear the word “But” that means that every word before it is a lie.
Bit by bit, the left sends our God given rights into oblivion. As long as the people are provided their wine and bread, they will gladly let themselves be shackled.
I suggested in an email to one of my representatives that we should tar and feather these constitutional traitors, but that was interpreted as a threat to the state, and resulted with some interesting visits from the state police.
Soon, vermont we be like connecticut.
Horrifying story. Prayers for you and what your family has had to endure.
Exactly.
BLUNDERBUSS = AN ASSAULT WEAPON!!
iF MY GGGGRANDFATHER WAS ALIVE TODAY WHAT WOULD HE DO?
EASY
THE MASSACRE AT WESTMINSTER, VERMONT COURTHOUSE
DEJA VU ALL OVER AGAIN COZ THE Vermont GOVT GUYS AIN`T AMERICANS, THEY IS FKN BRITISH!!! /
VT has long been a plaything of rich NYers. This pretty much completes the takeover.
OK. Vermont conservatives; start turning all your liberal neighbors in as persons thought to be "at risk". Those people should not have guns. But do it to them before they can do it to you!
No, you don't Phil. You may support hunting or target shooting, but that has nothing to do with the Second Amendment.
Any poll on ‘gun ownership’ is meaningless; I’ve answered one or two in my life and the standard response is ‘I don’t own any’. This new ‘law’ has many parts that are not enforceable and I expect several years of legal challenges.
For the past 237 years, since VT became a State, we’ve been able to buy and sell firearms in private transactions. Nobody anywhere knows who has what, or where they’re located. Since the law didn’t require records for private sales, we all started with a blank slate yesterday. Not every firearm is kept in ‘the home’ either. It would take a long time to search the 1500 acres of forest behind us.
How do they defend the 21 years of age when the age of inlistment can be as low as 17?!
...enlistment, with parental consent...
I’m certainly not defending this new law, but here’s what this particular section states:
If you are 18-21, you may purchase firearms if you:
a) have completed any approved firearm safety course (even at the minimum age for the course) such as Vermont’s hunter safety course, an NRA course, 4-H course, or Boy Scout course approved by the Commissioner of Fish and Wildlife;
b) are a member of law enforcement; or
c) are a member or veteran of the military.
If you read the article, “Understanding the Teen Brain” from the University of Rochester Medical Center (cited above), you might see the merit in young soldiers but restricting the electorate to citizens over 25. The same reasoning might apply to unsupervised gun ownership, although I was given the first gun of my own, an Iver Johnson 410 and a box of shells, when I was ten.
Oh Gail, I am so sorry for your loss.
Horrible!
Sending love and prayers to you!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.