There are many.RiverguyVT wrote:What benefits?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
There are many.RiverguyVT wrote:What benefits?
How many people wearing body armor do you think have been killed by armor piercing bullets?ip_law-hokie wrote:There are many.RiverguyVT wrote:What benefits?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I do not see a valid, non-military justification for armor piercing bullets.USN_Hokie wrote:How many people wearing body armor do you think have been killed by armor piercing bullets?ip_law-hokie wrote:There are many.RiverguyVT wrote:What benefits?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That's good, because the 2A protects weapons useful in a military conflict. You have more of right to an AR15 than Joe Biden's shotgun.ip_law-hokie wrote:I do not see a valid, non-military justification for armor piercing bullets.USN_Hokie wrote:How many people wearing body armor do you think have been killed by armor piercing bullets?ip_law-hokie wrote:There are many.RiverguyVT wrote:What benefits?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Got it.USN_Hokie wrote:That's good, because the 2A protects weapons useful in a military conflict. You have more of right to an AR15 than Joe Biden's shotgun.ip_law-hokie wrote:I do not see a valid, non-military justification for armor piercing bullets.USN_Hokie wrote:How many people wearing body armor do you think have been killed by armor piercing bullets?ip_law-hokie wrote:There are many.RiverguyVT wrote:What benefits?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
In fact, in US v. Miller, the SCOTUS ruled that sawed off shotgun was not protected because it served no military purpose.
themoreyouknow.jpg
Tell us all how a natural right is subject to rational basis review as you suggest above, counselor.ip_law-hokie wrote:Got it.USN_Hokie wrote:That's good, because the 2A protects weapons useful in a military conflict. You have more of right to an AR15 than Joe Biden's shotgun.ip_law-hokie wrote:I do not see a valid, non-military justification for armor piercing bullets.USN_Hokie wrote:How many people wearing body armor do you think have been killed by armor piercing bullets?ip_law-hokie wrote:There are many.RiverguyVT wrote:What benefits?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
In fact, in US v. Miller, the SCOTUS ruled that sawed off shotgun was not protected because it served no military purpose.
themoreyouknow.jpg
LOL. I’ll pass.USN_Hokie wrote:Tell us all how a natural right is subject to rational basis review as you suggest above, counselor.ip_law-hokie wrote:Got it.USN_Hokie wrote:That's good, because the 2A protects weapons useful in a military conflict. You have more of right to an AR15 than Joe Biden's shotgun.ip_law-hokie wrote:I do not see a valid, non-military justification for armor piercing bullets.USN_Hokie wrote:How many people wearing body armor do you think have been killed by armor piercing bullets?ip_law-hokie wrote: There are many.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
In fact, in US v. Miller, the SCOTUS ruled that sawed off shotgun was not protected because it served no military purpose.
themoreyouknow.jpg
I'll take "What did IP's colon say after being offered a juice cleanse" for $200, Alex.ip_law-hokie wrote: LOL. I’ll pass.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
and they are........ seriously this is like trying to discuss something with a 4 year oldip_law-hokie wrote:There are many.RiverguyVT wrote:What benefits?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Let's start with armour piercing bullets. Any measure that will remove these items from the general public is one benefit in my opinion.cwtcr hokie wrote:and they are........ seriously this is like trying to discuss something with a 4 year oldip_law-hokie wrote:There are many.RiverguyVT wrote:What benefits?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
All rifle ammunition will pierce soft body armor used by police.ip_law-hokie wrote:Let's start with armour piercing bullets. Any measure that will remove these items from the general public is one benefit in my opinion.cwtcr hokie wrote:and they are........ seriously this is like trying to discuss something with a 4 year oldip_law-hokie wrote:There are many.RiverguyVT wrote:What benefits?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
OK.USN_Hokie wrote:All rifle ammunition will pierce soft body armor used by police.ip_law-hokie wrote:Let's start with armour piercing bullets. Any measure that will remove these items from the general public is one benefit in my opinion.cwtcr hokie wrote:and they are........ seriously this is like trying to discuss something with a 4 year oldip_law-hokie wrote:There are many.RiverguyVT wrote:What benefits?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
A CZ52 using 7.62 X 25mm ammo will penetrate, easily, a NIJ IIA ballistic vest.USN_Hokie wrote:All rifle ammunition will pierce soft body armor used by police.
NYeckip_law-hokie wrote:Let's start with armour piercing bullets. Any measure that will remove these items from the general public is one benefit in my opinion.cwtcr hokie wrote:and they are........ seriously this is like trying to discuss something with a 4 year oldip_law-hokie wrote:There are many.RiverguyVT wrote:What benefits?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
IP: Thinks the 2A protects hunting....would ban all guns legal to shoot a dear with.ip_law-hokie wrote:OK.USN_Hokie wrote:All rifle ammunition will pierce soft body armor used by police.ip_law-hokie wrote:Let's start with armour piercing bullets. Any measure that will remove these items from the general public is one benefit in my opinion.cwtcr hokie wrote:and they are........ seriously this is like trying to discuss something with a 4 year oldip_law-hokie wrote:There are many.RiverguyVT wrote:What benefits?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
And yet, you named none.ip_law-hokie wrote:There are many.RiverguyVT wrote:What benefits?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Because said “benefits” never come about when these preferred laws of his are passed. Because it’s not an inanimate object....it’s people that are the problem.RiverguyVT wrote:And yet, you named none.ip_law-hokie wrote:There are many.RiverguyVT wrote:What benefits?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Again, get some knowledge by people that actually know the factsip_law-hokie wrote:Let's start with armour piercing bullets. Any measure that will remove these items from the general public is one benefit in my opinion.cwtcr hokie wrote:and they are........ seriously this is like trying to discuss something with a 4 year oldip_law-hokie wrote:There are many.RiverguyVT wrote:What benefits?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I always appreciate any knowledge you’d like to bestow.cwtcr hokie wrote:Again, get some knowledge by people that actually know the factsip_law-hokie wrote:Let's start with armour piercing bullets. Any measure that will remove these items from the general public is one benefit in my opinion.cwtcr hokie wrote:and they are........ seriously this is like trying to discuss something with a 4 year oldip_law-hokie wrote:There are many.RiverguyVT wrote:What benefits?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Its in the threads that you demonstrate your clueless about guns in, just readip_law-hokie wrote:I always appreciate any knowledge you’d like to bestow.cwtcr hokie wrote:Again, get some knowledge by people that actually know the factsip_law-hokie wrote:Let's start with armour piercing bullets. Any measure that will remove these items from the general public is one benefit in my opinion.cwtcr hokie wrote:and they are........ seriously this is like trying to discuss something with a 4 year oldip_law-hokie wrote:There are many.RiverguyVT wrote:What benefits?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
cwtcr hokie wrote:Again, get some knowledge by people that actually know the factsip_law-hokie wrote:Let's start with armour piercing bullets. Any measure that will remove these items from the general public is one benefit in my opinion.cwtcr hokie wrote:and they are........ seriously this is like trying to discuss something with a 4 year oldip_law-hokie wrote:There are many.RiverguyVT wrote:What benefits?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Who, in your opinion, has "facts." The most clear "fact" in this discussion is that the US has by far, the most permissive laws allowing possession of certain types of weapons. Also, the US sees gun violence in high schools at a rate that is standard deviations different than those countries with stricter gun laws. That evidence is overwhelming, its fact much like the roundess of earth. You are the one arguing that the earth is flat, yet you insult and mock a man who has all the facts on his side.cwtcr hokie wrote:Again, get some knowledge by people that actually know the factsip_law-hokie wrote:Let's start with armour piercing bullets. Any measure that will remove these items from the general public is one benefit in my opinion.cwtcr hokie wrote:and they are........ seriously this is like trying to discuss something with a 4 year oldip_law-hokie wrote:There are many.RiverguyVT wrote:What benefits?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
[emoji375][emoji375]fatman wrote:cwtcr hokie wrote:Again, get some knowledge by people that actually know the factsip_law-hokie wrote:Let's start with armour piercing bullets. Any measure that will remove these items from the general public is one benefit in my opinion.cwtcr hokie wrote:and they are........ seriously this is like trying to discuss something with a 4 year oldip_law-hokie wrote:There are many.RiverguyVT wrote:What benefits?
Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkWho, in your opinion, has "facts." The most clear "fact" in this discussion is that the US has by far, the most permissive laws allowing possession of certain types of weapons. Also, the US sees gun violence in high schools at a rate that is standard deviations different than those countries with stricter gun laws. That evidence is overwhelming, its fact much like the roundess of earth. You are the one arguing that the earth is flat, yet you insult and mock a man who has all the facts on his side.cwtcr hokie wrote:Again, get some knowledge by people that actually know the factsip_law-hokie wrote:Let's start with armour piercing bullets. Any measure that will remove these items from the general public is one benefit in my opinion.cwtcr hokie wrote:and they are........ seriously this is like trying to discuss something with a 4 year oldip_law-hokie wrote:There are many.RiverguyVT wrote:What benefits?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'm sure you'll provide a stupendous retort, could you please include why you think that gun laws in place the world over yielding YUGE results is irrelevant in your response? You guys act like a problem that only exists inside the jurisdiction of the NRA's political payroll is intractable.
WADR, this is a terrible application of statistics.fatman wrote: Who, in your opinion, has "facts." The most clear "fact" in this discussion is that the US has by far, the most permissive laws allowing possession of certain types of weapons. Also, the US sees gun violence in high schools at a rate that is standard deviations different than those countries with stricter gun laws. That evidence is overwhelming, its fact much like the roundess of earth. You are the one arguing that the earth is flat, yet you insult and mock a man who has all the facts on his side.
I'm sure you'll provide a stupendous retort, could you please include why you think that gun laws in place the world over yielding YUGE results is irrelevant in your response? You guys act like a problem that only exists inside the jurisdiction of the NRA's political payroll is intractable.
You may want to compare apples to apples, comparing the US to a country that does not have near the populations, land mass, and mix of people that the US has is not a fair comparison...but you know that.fatman wrote:cwtcr hokie wrote:Again, get some knowledge by people that actually know the factsip_law-hokie wrote:Let's start with armour piercing bullets. Any measure that will remove these items from the general public is one benefit in my opinion.cwtcr hokie wrote:and they are........ seriously this is like trying to discuss something with a 4 year oldip_law-hokie wrote:There are many.RiverguyVT wrote:What benefits?
Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkWho, in your opinion, has "facts." The most clear "fact" in this discussion is that the US has by far, the most permissive laws allowing possession of certain types of weapons. Also, the US sees gun violence in high schools at a rate that is standard deviations different than those countries with stricter gun laws. That evidence is overwhelming, its fact much like the roundess of earth. You are the one arguing that the earth is flat, yet you insult and mock a man who has all the facts on his side.cwtcr hokie wrote:Again, get some knowledge by people that actually know the factsip_law-hokie wrote:Let's start with armour piercing bullets. Any measure that will remove these items from the general public is one benefit in my opinion.cwtcr hokie wrote:and they are........ seriously this is like trying to discuss something with a 4 year oldip_law-hokie wrote:There are many.RiverguyVT wrote:What benefits?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'm sure you'll provide a stupendous retort, could you please include why you think that gun laws in place the world over yielding YUGE results is irrelevant in your response? You guys act like a problem that only exists inside the jurisdiction of the NRA's political payroll is intractable.