No Freedom of Arms, either.
As a follow-up to the lack of freedom of speech in CA, it's little-known news that San Francisco, one of the biggest haters of freedom and capitalism in the world, is voting Tuesday to attempt to ban all firearms.
Washington and Chicago have similar bans. How'd that work out? In addition,Current gun owners would have to surrender their arms by April if the measure passes.
Hello? Did San Francisco secede from the union and I didn't get the memo? I don't see how a law like this could exist for a minute with the second amendment around. Oh wait. You'd need someone to challenge the law, and I doubt there's even one dope-smoking, maggot-infested, long-hair peacenik in San Francisco that owns a firearm. And then, if one could be found, you'd have to get past the 9th circuit court that honestly believes you have no right to even teach your children. Can we just mine the San Andres fault and toss California out to sea?
Comments
I remember reading somewhere that London has 7x as much gun crime as New York City. While it is difficult to get a permit to have a gun in NYC, it is impossible in London. Thus only criminals dare have guns.
Posted by: Echo Zoe at November 07, 2005 12:44 PM (K+h36)
Posted by: oddybobo at November 07, 2005 01:46 PM (6Gm0j)
What I find most ironic about the "only criminals will have guns" line is that these laws not only allow current criminals to have guns, but also create more criminals of people like me who just ignore those laws.
Posted by: Ogre at November 07, 2005 02:00 PM (/k+l4)
Posted by: Windypundit at November 07, 2005 09:02 PM (2W2GT)
Posted by: Ogre at November 08, 2005 06:59 AM (/k+l4)
Posted by: Key at March 06, 2006 03:31 AM (S595D)
Posted by: Ogre at March 06, 2006 11:03 AM (CyQ4M)
Processing 0.01, elapsed 0.0102 seconds.
18 queries taking 0.0083 seconds, 15 records returned.
Page size 6 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.