Subj : Re: Charlie Kirk Murdered
To   : POINDEXTER FORTRAN
From : Dumas Walker
Date : Mon Sep 15 2025 10:44:30

>  DW> Did he say that they "need" to die, or that some might or could die?

>  Does it make a material difference to his stance?

"Need" sure sounds a lot more evil.  I guess if I was anti-2A, any talk of
people having guns would sound evil but, since I am not, I can see a
difference.

I can also understand that...

>  DW> In a whole lot of cases, the gun used were not obtained legally which,
>  DW> to me, means they fall outside of the second ammendment since the
>  DW> dumbass in question shouldn't have had the gun(s) to begin with.

>  The second amendment doesn't exclude illegally obtained guns. It was
>  also written in the age of breech-loading muskets.

 ...apparently the interpretation of the courts has for a long time been that
illegally obtained guns *are* excluded.  Otherwise, there would be no laws
against certain persons, like felons, the underaged, etc., obtaining guns
because all of those would be unconstitutional.

IMHO, there should be some stringent "tack on" charges that always kick in
whenever someone uses a stolen or otherwise illegally obtained gun during the
commission of a crime.  Should apply to any other weapons, too.


 * SLMR 2.1a * "Heh, heh, 2400 baud connects suck!" -- V.bis & Baudhead
---
 þ Synchronet þ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP

.