100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
| Topic: A Strict Gun Control Law That The NRA Should Back | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Here is a Strict Gun Control Law that should be forced into the State Constitution; one that the NRA on Principle should back.
All Elected Official, (other than Sheriff) Including Members of Congress when they are within the Legal Limits of the State's Authority, Their Staff, and any Party that provides Security, Shall Be as Limited as the Entire Non-Felony & Mentally Capable Population to Own, Carry, or Use any form of Firearm. The Authorizing Agency For a Carry Permit (If Any) Is Require to Prove Beyond All Doubt, Listing no less then Twenty Reasons (distent and well reasoned pertaining to that particular Elected Official, Staff Member, or Member of a Security Detail, Proving beyond all doubt that said Person would never misuse said Firearm), as to why an Elected Official, Including Members of Congress, their Staff, and Any & All Members of a Security Detail are Issued with a Carry Permit if there is more than 3% of Law Abiding Aplicants are Refused such a Permit. Any, and All Law abiding Citizens, shall be Empowered to Ensure that their Elected Officials are in Full Complience with this Law Upon Demand, at Any Time, in Any Public Space or Forum. Violation of Any Provision of this Law Shall be Considered a Class A Felony; punishable by no less then 20yrs in Prison. As I said, I believe that the NRA should, on Priciple, back such a Law; Let's see how much the Elected Officials believe in Gun Control if they are required to give up all of their Guns and face the Voters Unarmed. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here is a Strict Gun Control Law that should be forced into the State Constitution; one that the NRA on Principle should back. All Elected Official, (other than Sheriff) Including Members of Congress when they are within the Legal Limits of the State's Authority, Their Staff, and any Party that provides Security, Shall Be as Limited as the Entire Non-Felony & Mentally Capable Population to Own, Carry, or Use any form of Firearm. The Authorizing Agency For a Carry Permit (If Any) Is Require to Prove Beyond All Doubt, Listing no less then Twenty Reasons (distent and well reasoned pertaining to that particular Elected Official, Staff Member, or Member of a Security Detail, Proving beyond all doubt that said Person would never misuse said Firearm), as to why an Elected Official, Including Members of Congress, their Staff, and Any & All Members of a Security Detail are Issued with a Carry Permit if there is more than 3% of Law Abiding Aplicants are Refused such a Permit. Any, and All Law abiding Citizens, shall be Empowered to Ensure that their Elected Officials are in Full Complience with this Law Upon Demand, at Any Time, in Any Public Space or Forum. Violation of Any Provision of this Law Shall be Considered a Class A Felony; punishable by no less then 20yrs in Prison. As I said, I believe that the NRA should, on Priciple, back such a Law; Let's see how much the Elected Officials believe in Gun Control if they are required to give up all of their Guns and face the Voters Unarmed. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vise Versa What? Your reply isn't clear.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Conrad_73
on
Mon 03/11/13 12:43 PM
|
|
Vise Versa What? Your reply isn't clear.  Vice versa is a Latin phrase that means "the other way around". |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vise Versa What? Your reply isn't clear. look at England... their "bobbies" never carried guns, and as soon as their gun ban went into effect, the cops were carrying guns... big surprise, huh... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vise Versa What? Your reply isn't clear. look at England... their "bobbies" never carried guns, and as soon as their gun ban went into effect, the cops were carrying guns... big surprise, huh... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vise Versa What? Your reply isn't clear. But that would still leave the Elected Officials UNARMED, along with their Staff and their Security Detail; didn't I say Any Person Providing Security would be AS Limited? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
how do tote a gun in Chicago?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't see why the NRA or I would back a law that infringes on anyone's rights, other than criminals and mentally ill people, to have a gun in accordance with the second amendment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't see why the NRA or I would back a law that infringes on anyone's rights, other than criminals and mentally ill people, to have a gun in accordance with the second amendment. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Surmar
on
Mon 03/11/13 09:22 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't see why the NRA or I would back a law that infringes on anyone's rights, other than criminals and mentally ill people, to have a gun in accordance with the second amendment. It would take Guns away from the Elected Officials if they take Guns away from the People, and even the Criminals & Deranged would know that much;what would you bet that there would be a Vast Clearing of Gun Restretions taken off the Books if such a Proposal became Law. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
how do tote a gun in Chicago? Just don't tell anyone; besides, the Constitution is still the Supreme Law in the Land as I have enough to make a Constitution Fight out of the issue. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
how do tote a gun in Chicago? Just don't tell anyone; besides, the Constitution is still the Supreme Law in the Land as I have enough to make a Constitution Fight out of the issue. your secret is safe with me, i tell no one... |
|
|
|
|
