There was no goal post movement, it was a direct response to what you wrote. It looks to me like you’re excusing the infringement on the 2nd just because that’s the its always been.
Mexican nationals arrested while transporting 180,000 rounds of ammunition
- Thread starter WingsOfGold
- Start date
Sure was, you said "What is illegal about it?" I told you that it is illegal, showed what the article stated was the violation .
You then responded, "The constitution applies to visa holders also, so they should have a 2nd amendment right here." So you went from illegal to constitutional. That would be a GOAL POST SHIFT.
No, I am not excusing the infringement because that is the way it's always been. In actuality the infringement of the 2nd is less than a century old with the National Firearms Act of 1934 and the Gun Control Act of 1968. And I excuse none of it as I see such as entirely unconstitutional on the meaning of "shall not be infringed", but I also know that even with my take on the matter that laws are the law until repealed or struck down. By law they committed an illegal act.
BOP
Well-Known Member
The phrase "Mexican nationals" might be in play here.
I think where we’re crossing here is I’m saying constitutional is legal. If the Constitution applies to the visa holders it should mean it’s as legal for them to have a hundred thousand rounds as it would be for you to have a hundred thousand rounds
No, the crossing is with the law and its impact on a specific set of migrants, those with non-immigrant Visas, who are generally restricted to the activities allowed by their visa category. This instance is about the firearm law, 18 USC 922, and it carves most of them out of the mix.
Bare-ya-cuda
Well-Known Member
Would I have moved to be the cop that pulled them over. Police report: conducted traffic stop, determined suspects were in country illegally, probable cause led to search of vehicle turning up 80 rounds of ammo.