This is predictable banality. Gun control advocates-*read the literature*, not tweets—constantly say that both the Constitution and case law (specifically Scalia’s opinion in Heller) uphold the right to regulate firearms and to limit some kinds of firearms. So permitting (1)https://twitter.com/Neoavatara/status/1168357892531150849 …
-
-
First, you guys completely blew it re health care. Obama just wanted Romneycare and you turned that into The Death of Freedom—Frum warned you. No other conservative party in the world does not support some form of universal coverage. I’ll leave abortion to the side, too
-
contentious. SSM? Conservatives like
@walterolson support it. It is just and humane and diesnt affect anybody’s else’s life. But ok—**specifically** re guns, what do you imagine could be come law and also be constitutional and would also be remotely practical? Serious question. - Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Really? Slippery slope? Regulation today = confiscation tomorrow? That’s what you’re going with? And are you citing “single payer” and “abortion on demand” (neither of which we have in this country) as proof or disproof of your “argument?”
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.