The Great Gun Control Debate- 2.0

[Fishbone Jones]

I also don't care about their dirty money. I don't want it. I would sooner destroy my property than let them have it.

And that dirty money is yours to begin with. Those payments are your own taxes you submitted to the government.

 

[Haggis]

And that dirty money is yours to begin with. Those payments are your own taxes you submitted to the government.

And likely tsxable.

 

[IKnowNothing]

At the end of the day we have common law requiring fair payment for property made illegal, the government literally had to take out a massive loan to pay off slave owners. The government doesn’t get to pick and choose nor do they get to declare what they will or will not pay for.

You've said this a couple times now, and you've been given bad information.

A- banning through police powers is not the same as expropriation. If the government is not taking the property to own and derive public benefit from it then it is not expropriation and those legal guidelines don't apply.

B- Re- Compensated Emancipation - they didn't have to, they chose to - as a combination of bribe to enact the desired policy change and bailout to the impacted industries. Sommerset v Stewart laid out that there was no basis for slavery (people as property) under british common law in 1772.

 

[suffolkowner]

You've said this a couple times now, and you've been given bad information.

A- banning through police powers is not the same as expropriation. If the government is not taking the property to own and derive public benefit from it then it is not expropriation and those legal guidelines don't apply.

B- Re- Compensated Emancipation - they didn't have to, they chose to - as a combination of bribe to enact the desired policy change and bailout to the impacted industries. Sommerset v Stewart laid out that there was no basis for slavery (people as property) under british common law in 1772.

legalised theft is all it is. If it applies to firearms what else does it apply to?

 

[NavyShooter]

Because our Constitution contains no mention of property rights, it applies to everything.

 

[suffolkowner]

Because our Constitution contains no mention of property rights, it applies to everything.

the Constitution doesnt mention a whole lot of things being a very restricted set of documents. The Charter of course specifically avoided property rights.
I havent followed the CCFR case or what their arguments are or what they are limited to