cancel reply
Posting mode: Reply
Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
name e-mail subject pw(deletion)
Post and go
Bump thread?
  • Supported file types are: GIF, JPG, PNG
  • Maximum file size allowed is 3072 KB.
  • Javascript must be enabled for all of our addons to work.
  • Learn how to use wakabamark at the Wakaba Wiki.
  • View the changelog here.
who's online


File: 1253324258865.jpg - (51.99 KB, 482x373) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
53238 No.22400

Persons prohibited from owning a firearm under the Gun Control Act:

* Anyone who has been convicted in any court of, a felony punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding 1 year, excluding those crimes punishable by imprisonment related to the regulation of business practices.
* Anyone who is a fugitive from justice.
* Anyone who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance.
* Anyone who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to a mental institution.
* Any alien illegally or unlawfully in the United States or an alien admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa. The exception is if the nonimmigrant is in possession of a valid hunting license issued by a US state.
* Anyone who has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions.
* Anyone who, having been a citizen of the United States, has renounced his or her citizenship.
* Anyone that is subject to a court order that restrains the person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or child of such intimate partner. (Added in 1996, with the Lautenberg Amendment.)
* Anyone who has been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence. (Added in 1996, with the Lautenberg Amendment)
* A person who is under indictment or information for a crime (misdemeanor or felony) punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year cannot lawfully receive a firearm. Such person may continue to lawfully possess firearms obtained prior to the indictment or information, and if cleared or acquitted can receive firearms without restriction.
No.22401
File: 1253324709391.jpg - (240.30 KB, 1024x768) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
246072

I agree. But rule breakers don't play by the rules...so putting "no rule breakers allowed" in the "official hall monitor rule book" is kinda something. I don't know what word I'm looking for.

No.22402
File: 1253331308199.jpg - (193.26 KB, 600x661) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
197898

If your expectation is perfection, then you're going to end up taking my rights away. Being intellectually dishonest like the cartoonist is just a milestone on an extremist path.

No.22403
>Anyone who, having been a citizen of the United States, has renounced his or her citizenship.

Fair enough.

>Anyone who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to a mental institution.

Should be more of a case-by-case basis rather than "You are mental, no guns for you".

Whilst I admit the closest thing regular people are allowed in this country is airsoft weaponry (which imo is a lot more fun than joining the army with the sole purpose of shooting people), it's not impossible for the majority of American citizens to own their firearms of choice.

tl;dr, if you're enough of a retard to fall under one of these categories for whatever reason, barring the ones that could be interpreted as temporary and ones that are obviously not particularly fair in the first place, you shouldn't be fucking allowed firearms.

No.22412
File: 1253478399070.jpg - (19.66 KB, 300x427) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
20130
>Should be more of a case-by-case basis rather than "You are mental, no guns for you".

Look up the word ADJUDICATE. It does not mean "attacked by the Joooos".

>tl;dr, if you're enough of a retard to fall under one of these categories for whatever reason

I'm not happy about the Lautenberg Amendment, because you're (a) denying someone a constitutional right for a misdemeanor- not a felony and (b) grounds for restraining orders are so permissive today that they aren't directly linked to violence.

>Anyone who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance

Unlawfully dispensed medical marijuana, anybody?

No.22430

>>22412

>Anyone who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance

Pot possession was the first thing that came to my mind, too. Ridiculous.

>grounds for restraining orders are so permissive today that they aren't directly linked to violence.

Are you sure there's not a distinction drawn between violence and non-violence in domestic violations?

No.22434

There is a distinction, but it's overly permissive because of the definition of physical force.


Delete Post []
Password