Keyes: Constitution protects machine gun ownership

[Rose Siding]

Declaring "the front line of the war against terror once again involves the citizens," Republican Alan Keyes said Tuesday he believes the U.S. Constitution grants properly trained private individuals the right to own and carry machine guns.

"You're not talking about giving citizens access to atom bombs and other things," the former presidential candidate said. "That's ridiculous."

But the GOP nominee for U.S. Senate argued the founding fathers intended the Second Amendment to allow people to carry the types of weapons "customarily carried in those days by ordinary infantry soldiers."
...
Keyes made the remarks at a news conference he called to attack the "ideological extremism" of his Democratic opponent, state Sen. Barack Obama.
...
Keyes only indirectly answered a reporter's question about whether he would "be comfortable if the entire society was walking around with Uzis, as long as they were properly trained."

"Have you ever been to Israel?" Keyes asked the reporter. "Because if you've ever been to Israel, you wouldn't ask that question. And in the midst of terrifying dangers, you walk around the streets of Israel and you see every other person carrying arms and Uzis and so forth and so on, and believe me, you do not feel less safe on that account."


http://www.suntimes.com/output/elect/cst-nws-sen25.html

[Massacure]

1. He does have a point.

People should be allowed to have machines guns as long as they aren't felons, and have completed training for them.

[Merlin]

49. And who, exactly, should certify those conditions ? Who would that be ?

Would it be, maybe,

the government ?

Just askin.

[leeman67]

2. But he's still a loon.

[mzmolly]

3. Don't forget grenades!

:nuke:

[TahitiNut]

10. ... especially the rocket-propelled kind.

Yup. That's the ticket: an RPG in every pot. I'll go along with that. :eyes:

Let's see... where's my M-79? Oh, cool! Right here next to my claymores and M-50.
Time to get some exercise and go out and fill more sandbags.
The 'world' is feeling more and more like the utter insanity of a global combat zone every day.

[struggle4progress]

51. And it should be legal to use RPGs to fish in public parks. eom

[ProfessorGAC]

52. I Want My Flame Thrower!

You can have an RPG, and i'll have a flame thrower. We can go huntin' together.
The Professor

[TahitiNut]

77. I'd go on a LRP with you anytime, Prof!

We can get DemoTex and Magistrate to join us and we'd be unstoppable. :evilgrin:

[FeebMaster]

79. So get one.

Flame throwers aren't regulated by any of the current federal firearms laws. In fact, they aren't regulated at all, at least at the federal level.

[yellowcanine]

19. I think concealed howitzers should be allowed - and no exceptions

for schools and churches either! Teachers and preachers have their 2nd amendment rights also!

[TahitiNut]

21. "allowed"? Nawww .... PROVIDED!

:evilgrin:

[FeebMaster]

64. Well, grenades are regulated by the same laws

as machine guns.

[Renew Deal]

4. Attacks by terrorists in the US in the last 12 years: 3

Attacks in Isreal: 50+

EDIT: And I'm not sure how machine guns would have stopped those 3.

[fsbooks]

7. I always figured the 2nd amendment was meant

to defend us against our own government. The right to revolution.

Mind you, I've only shot 12 bullets in my life.

[Massacure]

85. That is why I agree with Keyes on this point.

Can't wage a war against the government without machine guns and RPGs.

[Crunchy Frog]

13. It's simple,

let all airline passengers carry Uzis on board with them.

[Ripley]

5. I wonder why someone would need to carry a

FREAKING machine gun around with them. This guy is nuts on steroids.

He thinks a woman is a terrorist for aborting a one month fetus, yet doesn't have a problem with Americans walking around with machine guns on our streets. Gee, I wonder if he thinks more gun deaths in America would be a good thing.

[barb162]

29. you notice the same thing I do

The inconsistency in their stances. Abortion drives Keyes and his followers crazy, but they don't seem to have a problem with the killing in Iraq (at least I don't hear them protesting the Iraq mess and all this killing).

[jtb33]

32. How would LAW ABIDING citizens having machine guns...

equate to "more deaths"?

[Ripley]

41. How do you know only law abiding citizens will buy them?

Criminals and nuts have to start some time. Can you guarantee me that everyone who buys one and carries it with them in public will not ever use it in a criminal way, or have an "accident" with it?

[jtb33]

80. Here's how:

Actually, when it comes down to it, you CAN'T! However, it is right that those of us who DO obey the law must be restricted because of the POSSIBILITY that others may not obey the law?

To buy a machine gun, you have to get a federal tax stamp. That will cost you $200, and you have to send your fingerprints and picture to the FBI. They do their stuff (with the ATF) and in about 6 months, if approved, you'll get your tax stamp and can take posession of the MG, but now it's FEDERALLY registered in YOUR name, and that machine gun cannot be available to anyone else without you right there. For example, you could NOT give your own wife the key to the safe that stores the machine gun. To sell it, the buyer has to submit all the paperwork, fingerprints, picture, $200, etc and go through the process before he can get it. If you transferred a MG without going through that process, guess who's responsible if it were used in any crime?

[NickB79]

86. Don't forget the cost of machineguns these days

Since the last new machineguns available for civilian sales were made in 1986, that means the existing ones command pretty extreme premiums. Paging through some online gun auction sites, I've very rarely seen any sell for less than $5000, with some going over $20,000. Plus, every single machinegun out there right now (about 250,000 if I remember correctly) is already recorded in a federal firearms database.

[JohnDoe1]

43. Easy

Law abiding citizens can easily freak out when presented with a stressful situation. Also, when machine guns become more prevalent, they will become easier for people to get (even if they shouldn't have them). Add a little alcohol, stress, or whatever and get ready for a firefight.

[NickB79]

58. So when's that gonna happen in CCW states?

You do realize that over 35 states allow citizens to carry concealed handguns and that there are literally millions of people with these permits, right? Your same argument was made back in the 1980's, when Florida began issuing CCW permits. Claims of Wild-West shootouts were commonly touted as being our future. Now, over 2/3 of the states in the US have these laws, and our crime rates have been falling for the past decade. Where are all these CCW carriers freaking out?

[iam]

50. Law abiding?

Did you know that everyone is law-abiding before they commit a crime? People are not born criminals, no infants have ever been arrested. So, a law abiding person (which everyone is at first) buys a machine gun and then becomes a criminal not with a club, but with a machine gun.
Gun control is not about reducing crime per se, it's about fewer dead people afterward.

[George W. Dunce]

66. Yea you're right

We have never had any law abiding citizens gun used to kill anyone. Please wake up. Children are killed every day by "law abiding citizens" guns.
" I felt a surge of power......like god must feel, when he's holding a gun"
Homer J Simpson

[kwolf68]

6. Guns Guns Guns

The more we can flood into the public, I mean...the better we are...We need GUNS GUNS GUNS...Constructs of machinery to do ONE THING: KILL.

God Bless America!!!

[Radius]

24. Nuts

He is nuts but..

I own guns and shoot skeet (clay).
A gun is like your car, how you use it determines what it does.
Left alone, it is machinery, inert. It requires human intervention to kill. Just like diesel fuel and fertilizer. How you use them is your choice.

[CO Liberal]

8. Alan Should Take One Of Those Machine Guns...

...and blow his f**king brains out. Useless asshole.

[barb162]

45. I second the motion

[Kool Kitty]

96. And after hearing him talk, I don't think he'd need a

machine gun. A BB gun should be able to handle what little bit of brain he has.

This is the man that the Republicans think is the most viable candidate to face Mr. Obama? Sad, sad, sad.

[moondust]

9. The 2nd Amendment places no restrictions on number or type

of "arms" that can be borne. It is therefore clearly intended for the "unlimited" collective protection of the collective--not the "unlimited" personal protection of the drunken cowboy.

[Mr.Green93]

11. you can't hunt traps with a machine gun

[Crunchy Frog]

12. Why can't the 2nd ammendment

be interpreted to mean private ownership of nukes. I don't get it, it only mentions arms, it doesn't make any distinction between types of arms. Last I checked, nuclear arms were considered arms.

On the other hand, if as he says, the founding fathers intended the Second Amendment to allow people to carry the types of weapons "customarily carried in those days by ordinary infantry soldiers.", then it should really only give people the right to possess muskets.

These sorts of questions really confuse me.

[Radius]

14. Congress

Passed laws in the thirties that restrict the types of weapons individuals can own. Machine guns(belt fed), select fire rifles, and suppressors are called Class3 weapons.

Explosives fall under different laws.

Class 3 weapons are available with a $500 tax stamp and federal background check, depending on the laws of your state.

No legally registered class3 weapon has ever been used in a crime.

Still making these weapons available to the general public is a bad idea.

[jtb33]

33. correction: $200 tax stamp for Class III/NFA Title II firearms

n/t

[Radius]

36. oops, was shooting from hip, ha. Not broke, dont fix.(NT)

[Crunchy Frog]

72. Sounds like those laws

violate the 2nd Ammendment of the Constitution.:shrug:

[TahitiNut]

20. In all of human history, through the time of the writing of the ...

... Constitution, there was no single weapon beyond the means of large numbers of private individuals to possess. Indeed, when the age of liberal revolutions overthrew imperialist monarchies such weaponry was available to all. It was by sheer force of numbers (a perverse kind of 'populism'), not the economically-limited access to any particular kind of weapon, that monarchies and autocracies achieved, and then lost, dominance.

Any distinction, then, between one kind of 'arm' and another, would have been conjectural and irrelevant.

[Radius]

30. Looking glass

I'm a fairly moderate domocrat. Some find these moderate opinions really upsetting.

But on guns, I really disagree with that position. The constitution is a framework that is designed to be modified and applied to the US as time progresses.

The framers did not anticipate genetic cloning and their status as a person. They did not anticipate gang violence.

It is very unwise to make heavy weapons available to the public without oversight. Their use in crime, namley the thompson sub machine gun, led to the law in the first place. The assault rifle ban is a joke, accomplished nothing. Just like the german words it is based on it was all drama.

You can still buy the same types of weapons as before.

However making class 3 weapons available to the public with out strict oversight is a monumentally stupid idea. If you want to buy an m-16 you can, just have to do lots of paperwork.

[NickB79]

37. If I'm interpreting Keyes right

He's saying that US citizens should be allowed the same arms as those carried by individual soldiers in the field, as the original point of the 2nd Amendment was to allow citizens to be armed and act in defense of their nation. No individual soldier in the field is ever authorized to carry a nuclear warhead, however.

[NickB79]

67. Anyone?

I know in Starship Troopers they had mini-nukes that were man-portable, but until that day comes I don't think battlefield troops have ever been issued nukes, have they?

[Crunchy Frog]

70. So I should be able to own

a hand held rocket launcher. Thanks.

[FeebMaster]

74. You already can. (nt)

[GOPFighter]

38. Exactly!

It says arms, not guns, not firearms, it says arms. And it says "shall not be infringed." So either we interpret it as a collective right or we allow anyone and everyone, the right to carry any arm they choose. Nuclear or conventional.

[Radius]

39. Explosives

Explosives like class 3 weapons are regulated. I would assume that means nuclear and conventional.

You cant buy C-4 at Lowes..

You can get a license if you want to.

[ProfessorGAC]

55. Circular Logic

You keep referencing the regulations of Class 3 weapons and explosives. But, the existence of the regulations doesn't validate them.

You are essentially saying that even though the Constitution says "arms" the gov't can ammend the definition, but can't ammend the right to allow the arms. Then, on top of that, you say it CAN allow the right by passing regulations.

The bits here about nukes and RPG's, et al are intended to show the folly of the position that the Constitution says everything goes.

Nobody here (at least not me) really wants a nuke or a flame thrower. But, if the regulations you keep spouting are valid, then why aren't similar regulations against any firearm. Selective adherence to a RIGHT is simply not logical. Either the right is regulatable, or it isn't.
The Professor

[Radius]

65. might be an oval

I stated earlier that the constitution is a dynamic document.
This allows for all types of regulation from "free speech" on down the list of rights.

This thread has taken on a looking glass feel for DU.

Your points are a legal issue and like the constitution are intrepreted differently as time moves on..

Binary thought works well for computer systems and math, not so well to the law.

[Bake]

75. So if it's a "collective" right, who gets to carry?

Does that mean all of us just jointly carry around one gun? Do we pass it back and forth? And if there's an attack on the "collective" isn't it individuals who get killed? Just asking ...

I do think Keyes should just keep on talking. I'm sure the good people of Illinois want their Senator advocating that everybody walk the streets packing an Uzi.

Also, other than the part about "well-regulated", I don't think the Constitution says diddly-squat about being "trained" to carry anything.

One other point. When the Constitution was written, wasn't the musket pretty much the ultimate weapon, except for a frickin' CANNON? Keyes' analogy doesn't take long to break down.

Bake

[ProfessorGAC]

54. I'll Take One MIRV Please

Good point. Talk about mutually assured destruction. "Walk on my property, i nuke the city. Police bother me about my barking dog, i nuke the city."

That's a good way to make us safer, huh Alan? (What a misanthrope!)
The Professor

[nonbelief]

15. 2nd Ammendment, huh?

I suggest you Americans limit automatic gun ownership to single shot muskets and cannon.

And tri-corn hats for all!

[ChrisK]

16. I'm a bit thrown off by this line

"The front line of the war against terror once again involves the citizens".

I'm not all too sure how giving American citizens machine guns will stop terrorist...Its not like we are under siege day in and day out as is the case in Israel, whats odd is that machine guns like the Uzi have lousy aiming and seem to be made to spray a large area or crowd's of people, a handgun or long nose rifle seems better so as not to hit bystanders.

I think one of the better ways to stop terrorism in America is to plugging the holes that some terrorist will use to enter this country like crossing borders in Mexico and Canada illegally and set up shop once here, arming Americans with machine guns wouldn't do allot to stop these kinds of terrorists which seems more likely to be the ones we citizens will have to deal with in the near future.

Mr keys seems to grab an issues out of thin air and try to "spin it" in a way that makes Mr Obama look bad..funny thing is that the only one looking bad is Mr Keys in not grasping full understanding of whats needed to fix a problem.

[madrchsod]

17. the second amendment

does not forbid any government agency from regulating the type of weapon that can be bought or sold.

[Radius]

18. Congress

has ability to pass laws not listen in the constitution. Abortion, Hate speech, affirmitave action are not directly regulated in the constitution but are legally regulated under law.

Machine guns are not banned but controlled.

[jtb33]

34. "shall not be infringed..." eom

[Democat]

22. Does it also protect yelling "fire" in a movie theater?

The first amendment does not make any exceptions.

[Radius]

25. Nope (NT)

[Chico Man]

23. It sure as hell might make the govt think twice

Before dicking over the citizens.

Can't we all just get along?

[neverborn]

26. If the 2nd Amendment only applies to muskets the 1st only applies to quill

[llmart]

27. This guy hasn't got a snowball's chance in hell......

of beating Obama, so he has to make outrageous statements such as these to get attention. Crawl back into the hole you came out of you jerk!

[barb162]

46. more voters will turn against him

in Illinois (I hope). In my humble, I want him to lose by the largest margin ever. I would think most parents, even Republican and independents or those otherwise sitting on the fence, would not appreciate his comments yesterday and vote against him.

[barb162]

28. when you have a disagreement

with your neighbors, you can show them your uzi. That'll get their attention.

[jtb33]

35. ...and then get arrested for "brandishing". eom

[barb162]

44. brandishing

Remember Ruth Gordon as Clint Eastwood's mother in "Any which way but loose" I believe the movie was called. She sat on the porch of this house with a shotgun on her lap. Pretended she was a defenseless little old lady until she started shooting at some people.
The Keyes vision of the average suburban neighborhood.

[Tamyrlin79]

31. What? No Strict Constructionism???

i thought the main judicial platform for the Repugs was strict constructionism, which requires that the constitution be interpreted only as the founders intended when written and that our understandings of the principles embodied do not evolve over time. by this logic, machine guns did not exist at the time of the 2nd Amendment and would therefore not be covered... right?

Yet another example of Republican double-standards.

[Emboldened Chimp]

40. I just love how these wingnuts defend the 2nd Amendment...

while our 4th Amendment is now non-existent thanks to the fucking Patriot Act. What about the 4th, you fucking lurking freeps? It's ok for the gov't to stick it's nose into your papers and effect, so long as you get to carry your piece? How 'bout it, you lurking fuckwads, what say you?

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProfessorGAC]

56. National Sales Tax???

Boy, do you have some need for a deeper education! The NST is the dumbest idea in economic history. NST somehow relates to gun ownership? Wow! That's a quantum leap in logic.
The Professor

[Name removed]

60. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Emboldened Chimp]

57. My eloquence comes from years of bitter anger towards Freeper hypocrisy...

In my opinion, mining personal data, medical records, bank statements and my library records is far and away more invasive than paying taxes. The government has no business knowing about who I am and what I do, terrorism or no. But my point was most on the right are quick to defend the 2nd, but tend to ignore the dismantling of our other rights. I brought up the 4th merely as an example.

A national sales tax would be disastrous for poorer classes, who are already getting reamed because their quality of life is already crap. In my opinion, taxes wouldn't be an issue if my dollars were not used for illegal wars and Halliburton profit. I'd much rather have my money go towards education, national health care, debt reduction, etc...you know, things that actually improve quality of life rather than degrade it.

-another phish_head

[Name removed]

62. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[kiahzero]

93. You can argue it's "much more invasive"

But the Federal Government has the expressed power to do it. So it being "much more invasive" is completely irrelevant.

26 posts... advocating a ridiculous right-wing viewpoint... :think:

[Gore1FL]

98. The only think they are defendinf the 2nd

The are really defending the 9th,10th and State Constitutions.

[PurityOfEssence]

42. A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,

means you should be able to keep a damned nuclear weapon, but it implies that you should only be using it when the government calls upon you to help defend the Republic...

They's injuns in them woods!

[struggle4progress]

48. My neighbors will love the new machine gun nest on my balcony. eom

[barb162]

61. but their kids will say

mommy mommy the neighbor has a machine gun...can we have one too, please mommy, please, please

[Merlin]

53. So they should be legal carry-on on flights within the US, too, right?

I mean, hell, if the constitution protects the right, then it protects the right, damn it! None of these pointy-head, liberal reasoned exceptions. If you can carry them in your car, if you can take them into a bar, if you can pack 'em on a train, then you can carry 'em onto a plane!

[Mike Niendorff]

59. Why only machine guns? Why not nerve gas? Anthrax? H-bombs?

I mean, the 2nd Amendment doesn't even include the word "guns". It says "arms". So, why not include chemical or biological arms under its auspices? Why not even nuclear weapons? After all, there is nothing in the text of the Amendment that limits "arms" only to guns. Arms means arms, doesn't it? I mean, who the hell is Alan Keyes to discriminate against people who simply prefer nerve gas over machine guns!? Machine guns are heavy and soooo unfashionable. But chemical or biological weapons are small and light, and can be made to fit with almost any wardrobe. And I'm sure that, with proper training, neither one will endanger anyone at all. Plus, when anthrax is outlawed, only outlaws will have anthrax, right? I think that's what Rush told me ... Anyway, we cannot allow our citizens to be out-armed on our own soil! We must be vigilant against the threat of terrorism! So, Alan Keyes: stop supporting terrorists! Strict Constructionism! Pry it from my cold, dead fingers! Grrrrrr!

(insert further freeperisms here, as appropriate)

</sarcasm>


MDN

[tlcandie]

63. But I don't want a gun .. I want to own and be able to use a LRAD!!

Will the gun people please stand up for me so that I can own one of those and the new energy one that emits actual pain to the person it is directed at once it's manufactured and in full swing?

EDIT: After all, they are publicized as NON-LETHAL!

[Radius]

68. Laser

You can buy parts to make a 10watt IR (invisible beam)laser that will fit in your hand..No regulation.

Invisible beam, destroys cornea in about 3 seconds.

Most states actually have laws against posessing wmd's. I think binary agents fall under that category. So does a meth lab, interestingly enough..

[tlcandie]

69. So why are they classified as NON-LETHAL if they are destructive

and it is against the law to possess.. WMDs?!?!

[Radius]

73. On the books

In NC no wmds. It is a felony to shoot someones dog as well. Misdemeanor to beat your kids. The law is very strange.

You can posess a laser capable of blinding people, the device you are refrencing is crowd control, like mace, right.

Obviously of you go around blinding people you will go to jail, since that device (laser) would probably burn a hole right on in to someones brain.

Posession and use, different issues. The root topic here is pretty nuts. Even moderates like me, hell right wingers don't want every moron on the street to have Sub Machine guns and Select fire rifles.

[KamaAina]

71. What?! Keyes wants to take away my nukes?

"You're not talking about giving citizens access to atom bombs and other things," the former presidential candidate said. "That's ridiculous."

That no-good low-down Communist bastard! I stand by my Gawd-given Second Amendment right to nuke any gawddamned thing I want to! Keyes can just go back to Maryland with all the other commies for all I care!

:nuke: :nuke: :nuke:

</sarcasm>

[Sven77]

76. Dictators agree. Gun control works.

The second the government takes away citizens rights to bare arms they will enslave us all. Protect the right to bare arms. PS. I dont own a gun.

[Name removed]

78. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[barb162]

84. what about England?

I think England has strict gun control laws (not totally sure though)

[Nevernose]

91. I own several guns

None of them are machine guns. Frankly, since I don't own a large gun safe, I'm more afraid of them being stolen than I am of protecting myself during a home invasion/military coup.

[Zerex71]

81. GOP: Party of Fear

And that's what I find is the most common trait among conservatives -- fear. They're afraid of life. They're afraid of change. They're afraid of others i.e. non-conservatives. The funny thing is, they always act like they are in fear of someone coming to take their money or their possessions -- as if they've got so much that someone wants in the first place. It never happens but they live their lives thinking it will. Sick, sick individuals.

Mike

[FeebMaster]

82. Huh?

What does that have to do with Alan Keyes or machine guns?

They're afraid of change.

Apparently not afraid of changing the laws currently regulating machine guns, though.

[Hobarticus]

83. Is he trying to set a record for WORST place in election history???

[Tight_rope]

87. Awww...I see that Keyes trying to get the noose a little tighter around

his neck. He's truly a "political idoit" :spank:

[struggle4progress]

88. Keyes must remember Prohibition Chicago fondly ...

Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence Asks if Alan Keyes is Serious About Legalizing Machine Guns

Alan Keyes Wants to Take Illinois Back to the 'Good Old Days' of the 1930s

CHICAGO, Aug. 25 /PRNewswire/ -- The following is being issued by the
Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence:

Alan Keyes, the Maryland resident running for the Illinois Senate, said yesterday that machine guns should be legal.

Not semiautomatic assault weapons, mind you -- the guns that were outlawed 10 years ago. Mr. Keyes is for legal machine guns, which came under extraordinary federal regulation in the 1930s after the guns were misused by another guy named Al -- Al Capone.

The manufacture of new machine guns was banned under the McClure-Volkmer Act of 1986.

Keyes' comments, published today in the Chicago Sun-Times, were made at a press conference in which he was criticizing "ideological extremism" of his opponent.
<snip>

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=109&STORY=/www/story/08-25-2004/0002238669&EDATE=

[FeebMaster]

89. Hahah.

Yeah, the big problem with prohibition was that machine guns were unregulated at the time.

It's interesting, really. The National Firearms Act was passed not long after prohibition ended. Some might say the whole reason it was passed was to give all of those now under worked treasury agents something to do rather than lay them off.

[struggle4progress]

94. Machine guns didn't kill people on St. Valentine's Day -- people ...

killed people?

[FeebMaster]

95. Sigh.

People with machine guns obviously killed people on St. Valentine's day. Of course, there was still no urgent need to regulate machine guns until after organized crime didn't have alcohol to fight over anymore five whole years after the St. Valentine's Day Massacre.

[St. Jarvitude]

90. They used machine guns in the Revolutionary War? Really?

But the GOP nominee for U.S. Senate argued the founding fathers intended the Second Amendment to allow people to carry the types of weapons "customarily carried in those days by ordinary infantry soldiers."

Huh.

[despairing optimist]

92. Fast-forward to 2008 and the GOP Convention . . .

It's Alan Keyes as the party's presidential candidate and Bernhard Goetz in the veep position. Walking to the podium hand-in-hand to bathe in triumph on the convention's final night, their matching black leather holsters swinging to and fro with the weight of four Uzis between them, the gunslingers embrace awkwardly. Above them one banner screams, "From My Cold, Dead Hands . . .," and another "Jesus Saves." Confetti the color of birdshot drops on cue from overhead containers and engulfs everyone in the vast assembly hall.

Oh, God. I've got to stop eating ice cream so late. This could really happen.

[Gore1FL]

97. The argument is valid insomuch as Amd 9 and 10

but then the states have the right to regulate it.

His argument is akin to "The Constitution Protects the right to drive 300 mph.

True statement, but states are empowered to regluate.

You would think Keyes would understand the concept of Federal and State Powers as many times as he has run for office.

[scarface2004]

99. well the gop just wrapped up the machine gun vote

i can see it now....the streets of amerika turning into the scene from 'heat' where the bank heist goes bad and dinero and kilmer have to machine gun there way outta there!!! along with sizemore of course!

[FeebMaster]

100. Yeah, if you buy the Heat DVD

there's a deleted scene where Robert De Niro and Val Kilmer are filling out the paperwork to send to the ATF before they buy those machine guns they used to rob the bank. They're all complaining about having to get signed off by the local chief law enforcement officer and having to pay the $200 tax. Kilmer's character was especially pissed about the fingerprints and photos they had to send along with the paperwork. My favorite part was the five months later fade in where they pick the machine guns up from their local machine gun dealer.

[Dr Fate]

101. Are they REALLY putting this guy against Obama?

Is it too late for them to take this back?

Obama will shred this dude...