(February 21, 2021 at 5:14 pm)onlinebiker Wrote:(February 21, 2021 at 4:31 pm)Rev. Rye Wrote: And needing to get a license to carry a firearm is bad why exactly? We require licenses for anyone who wants to get behind the wheel of a car, and that wasn’t designed with the explicit purpose of punching a hole in something at such a speed that it stops being alive (and whether that something is a deer or an enemy soldier or what have you, there’s no getting around the fact that that’s a gun’s entire reason for existing.) So why not a firearm? If actually getting said firearms license was virtually impossible (at least for people who aren’t a danger to themselves or others) you might have a point there, but if that isn’t the case, then what exactly is the problem?
Also, can you find examples of your point that are more recent than the 1930s?
The "slight" difference is weapon ownership is a right guaranteed by the Constitution.
Should you have to have a license to exercise your first ammendment rights?
Gee what a WONDERFUL idea - then we can control what people say!
FFS, speech is regulated too. News stations that use public airwaves have to have broadcasting licensing. I know, I have interned in TV and worked in Radio. I would have gotten fired from the radio station I worked at if I said "fuck" on air. Cable tv shows like Real Time are regulated differently and don't rely on public airwaves. You can even be fined for not playing station IDs at the legal time required.
Even if one runs a private media network, it is still a business, and still requires a business license. Regulations are not calls for bans. Just like having health inspectors check a restaurant is not a call to ban selling food.
You also cannot shout fire in a theatre if there is none.
