State-by-State Gun Laws

The friendliest place on the web for anyone with an RV or an interest in RVing!
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
s far as loading our own I do and if they were able to stop the sale of ammo they would also more than likely stop the sale of the components to make it.
Sure, but some have a lifetime supply of such stuff. And there are a lot of people who stocked up on ammo in CA while they were talking about the BGCs for ammo.

If there is anything that boosts gun and ammo sales, it is when new gun control laws are going to be passed. Often to the point of causing a shortage.

-Don- Reno, NV
 
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
It's right there. Plain as day.

Any discussion that only talks about the rights of an individual, and ignores the responsibilities of the same individual is doing a disservice to us all.
 
Can you quote Second Amendment, in full, for us?
Nowhere does it say a militia is required. One of a million possible reasons being listed for the right doesn't mean the right to use guns for hunting can be infringed. And the issue has been settled at the SCOTUS. Case is closed.

-Don- Reno, NV
 
Can you quote Second Amendment, in full, for us?
I know there is nothing in there about tests or training. I am the first one that thinks anybody that uses firearms should know how to safely but comparing a right to a privilege is silly even if you don't agree with the right.

I also know there is nothing mentioned it about hunting but some think there is.
 
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
It's right there. Plain as day.

Any discussion that only talks about the rights of an individual, and ignores the responsibilities of the same individual is doing a disservice to us all.
Who is ignoring the responsibilities?
 
Nowhere does it say a militia is required. One of a million possible reasons being listed for the right doesn't mean the right to use guns for hunting can be infringed. And the issue has been settled at the SCOTUS. Case is closed.

-Don- Reno, NV
Case is not closed. SCOTUS can reverse case law and precedent.
 
I am the first one that thinks anybody that uses firearms should know how to safely
I can agree with that much. About the only CA gun law I agree with is their firearm safety certificate which makes sure you at least know the basics of firearm safety.

-Don- Reno, NV
 
Who is ignoring the responsibilities?
"
...I have an example.
I saw a guy in Walmart with his semiautomatic pistol with an extended magazine stuck in the front of pants. That may be technically legal in AZ but from my perspective it’s irresponsible and a bad decision. Who knows, he may have blown his junk off by now.
"
You want a list of examples?
 
"
...I have an example.
I saw a guy in Walmart with his semiautomatic pistol with an extended magazine stuck in the front of pants. That may be technically legal in AZ but from my perspective it’s irresponsible and a bad decision. Who knows, he may have blown his junk off by now.
"
You want a list of examples?
I agree that is stupid and not responsible but I for one do not ignore the responsibilities so can't see why I should lose my right because of that guy in Walmart.

FWIW do you know if the semi auto was loaded? Would it have been OK if he was not using an extended magazine?
 
I agree that is stupid and not responsible but I for one do not ignore the responsibilities so can't see why I should lose my right because of that guy in Walmart.

FWIW do you know if the semi auto was loaded? Would it have been OK if he was not using an extended magazine?
And where was there ever a suggestion that you "...should lose my right because of that guy in Walmart." ?

as for "FWIW do you know if the semi auto was loaded? Would it have been OK if he was not using an extended magazine?"

From my earliest Firearm training, "There is no such thing as an unloaded firearm." And, It matters little what sort of magazine it has." That was not my anecdote. And I have no more to say to you.

Thanks for playing.
 
And where was there ever a suggestion that you "...should lose my right because of that guy in Walmart." ?

as for "FWIW do you know if the semi auto was loaded? Would it have been OK if he was not using an extended magazine?"

From my earliest Firearm training, "There is no such thing as an unloaded firearm." And, It matters little what sort of magazine it has." That was not my anecdote. And I have no more to say to you.

Thanks for playing.
You are welcome. It has been fun.
 
an you quote Second Amendment, in full, for us?
How about this part, the only part of the 2nd Amendment that is meaningful to all of us, direct from the SCOTUS:

  • "The Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to possess a firearm unconnected with militia service. It includes the right to use firearms for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home."
 
I enjoyed the thread about the right way to use toilet paper better. There's nothing in the constitution about that is there ? :p
 
There's nothing in the constitution about that is there
Anything NOT mentioned in the US Constitution is a State's Rights issue. So that issue can vary by state.

IMO, things that are mentioned, such as the right to bear arms, is clearly federal and no state should even be allowed to have their own laws to infringe on such federal rights. IMO, all gun laws should be left to the feds, except for how and where they are used within the state.

IOW, no type of gun should be legal in one state but not the next. That should be federal only.

If any questions, see the 10th amendment.


-Don- Reno, NV
 
Last edited:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
It's right there. Plain as day.

Any discussion that only talks about the rights of an individual, and ignores the responsibilities of the same individual is doing a disservice to us all.
Read this, then my definition below:

10 U.S. Code § 246 - Militia: composition and classes

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.


Paragraph (b)(2) is...everybody else. You me, Don, Kirk, everybody. It's right there. Plain as day.
 
The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
So the 2nd Amendment only applies to males between the ages of 17-45 and females that are citizens and members of the National Guard.
 
Back
Top Bottom