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
This lawsuit against a gun shop sets a dangerous precedent
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="Pokinfun" data-source="post: 2969236" data-attributes="member: 28113"><p>in the second section, they said that intoxicating liquors are a Constitutional Right, but it gives a state the ability to regulate or prohibit intoxicating liquors, within its borders, but not federally. I guess sort of in comparison to the Thirteen Amendment, did it make slavery legal or illegal federally? The Second Amendment does not specifically give a state the right to regulate Arms. I was making the point that both are a Right, but a state has the Right to require a bartender to cut someone off. My question is, is an FFL required to stop a sale, if someone calls and says someone is crazy, in comparison to a bartender? If so, can a state regulate the sale of a firearm based on a someone believing someone else is crazy?</p><p></p><p>Lastly, the more I think about it the more vacuous my statement sounds.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Pokinfun, post: 2969236, member: 28113"] in the second section, they said that intoxicating liquors are a Constitutional Right, but it gives a state the ability to regulate or prohibit intoxicating liquors, within its borders, but not federally. I guess sort of in comparison to the Thirteen Amendment, did it make slavery legal or illegal federally? The Second Amendment does not specifically give a state the right to regulate Arms. I was making the point that both are a Right, but a state has the Right to require a bartender to cut someone off. My question is, is an FFL required to stop a sale, if someone calls and says someone is crazy, in comparison to a bartender? If so, can a state regulate the sale of a firearm based on a someone believing someone else is crazy? Lastly, the more I think about it the more vacuous my statement sounds. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
This lawsuit against a gun shop sets a dangerous precedent
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom