Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Gun and Ammo magazine supports gun control???
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="pak-40" data-source="post: 2330530" data-attributes="member: 5756"><p>Quote:</p><p>"echnical Editor Dick Metcalf penned the editorial for the December issue. Metcalf, a writer whose technical knowledge (or lack thereof) has earned him brickbats before, bases his editorial on a distinction between infringement and regulation. I bring this up, Metcalf writes, because way too many gun owners still believe that any regulation of the right to keep and bear arms is an infringement. The fact is that all Constitutional rights are regulated, always have been, and need to be. That, dear reader, is a major WTF moment. One of many . . .</p><p></p><p>Metcalfs dietribe [sic] turns to the antis favorite justification for infringing on our natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms: you Cant yell FIRE! in a crowded theater. Yes. Yes you can. Its just that youre legally responsible for what happens next. And what happens next in Metcalfs editorial is bizarreespecially for an article that appears in a gun magazine:</p><p></p><p>Many argue that any regulation at all is, by definition, an infringement. If that were true, then the authors of the Second Amendment themselves, should not have specified well-regulated. </p><p></p><p><a href="http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Lets-Talk-Limits-by-Dick-Metcalf-of-Guns-Ammo-December-2013.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Lets-Talk-Limits-by-Dick-Metcalf-of-Guns-Ammo-December-2013.pdf</a></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pak-40, post: 2330530, member: 5756"] Quote: "echnical Editor Dick Metcalf penned the editorial for the December issue. Metcalf, a writer whose technical knowledge (or lack thereof) has earned him brickbats before, bases his editorial on a distinction between infringement and regulation. I bring this up, Metcalf writes, because way too many gun owners still believe that any regulation of the right to keep and bear arms is an infringement. The fact is that all Constitutional rights are regulated, always have been, and need to be. That, dear reader, is a major WTF moment. One of many . . . Metcalfs dietribe [sic] turns to the antis favorite justification for infringing on our natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms: you Cant yell FIRE! in a crowded theater. Yes. Yes you can. Its just that youre legally responsible for what happens next. And what happens next in Metcalfs editorial is bizarreespecially for an article that appears in a gun magazine: Many argue that any regulation at all is, by definition, an infringement. If that were true, then the authors of the Second Amendment themselves, should not have specified well-regulated. [url]http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Lets-Talk-Limits-by-Dick-Metcalf-of-Guns-Ammo-December-2013.pdf[/url] [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Gun and Ammo magazine supports gun control???
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom