The people set the fee, that is tiny compared to the value of a life, and the judge made the decision to legislate from the bench. He is standing against the people.

...(also called parliamentary supremacy or legislative supremacy)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary_sovereignty

As Lord Acton said, "The one pervading evil of democracy is the tyranny of the majority, or rather of that party, not always the majority, that succeeds, by force or fraud, in carrying elections."
Think trump and what a trump administration would do to the country.

It is the business of the judiciary to consider if a law is constitutional or not.

A history of opinions on arms control and personal weapons:

>> "Civil Wars happen when the victimized are armed. Genocide happens when they are not." - A.E. Samaan

>> "Am I the only one who finds it unconscionable that an Air Force fighter can now shoot down a hijacked civilian airliner full of passengers, but the pilots of that airliner are not allowed to defend the aircraft from the hijacker, thus preventing the hijacking in the first place?" - American Airlines Capt. Tom Snelling

>> "If you’ve got to resist, you’re chances of being hurt are less the more lethal your weapon. If that were my wife, would I want her to have a .38 Special in her hand? Yeah." - Dr Arthur Kellerman

>> "If the price I must pay for my freedom is to acknowledge that the government was granted the power to infringe on them, then I am not free." - Pol Anderson

>> "These practices, amply documented in hearings before this Subcommittee, leave little doubt that the Bureau (of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms) has disregarded rights guaranteed by the constitution and laws of the United States. It has trampled upon the second amendment by chilling exercise of the right to keep and bear arms by law-abiding citizens. It has offended the fourth amendment by unreasonably searching and seizing private property. It has ignored the Fifth Amendment by taking private property without just compensation and by entrapping honest citizens without regard for their right to due process of law." - Report of the Subcommittee on the Constitution of the United States Senate (1982)

>> "If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun." - The Dalai Lama

>> "The world is filled with violence. Because criminals carry guns, we decent law-abiding citizens should also have guns. Otherwise they will win and the decent people will lose." - James Earl Jones

>> "The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms." - Samuel Adams

>> "Without doubt one is allowed to resist against the unjust aggressor to one's life, one's goods or one's physical integrity; sometimes, even 'til the aggressor's death… In fact, this act is aimed at preserving one's life or one's goods and to make the aggressor powerless. Thus, it is a good act, which is the right of the victim." - Thomas Aquinas

>> "Though defensive violence will always be 'a sad necessity' in the eyes of men of principle, it would be still more unfortunate if wrongdoers should dominate just men." - Augustine of Hippo

>> And he said to them, "When I sent you out with no moneybag or knapsack or sandals, did you lack anything?" They said, "Nothing." He said to them, "But now let the one who has a moneybag take it, and likewise a knapsack. And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one..." - Luke 22:36

Feel the same way about any other enumerated rights?

Or just the ones you don't like?

He should speak up more against him.

The idea of a poll tax or "speech permit" and free speech zones would infuriate them.

It's a very selective and hypocritical form of "outrage".

I could be wrong but I don't recall you ever speaking anything except favorably of exorbitant taxes on guns. Hence, my supposition seems fair. If the consequences of your support for exorbitant gun taxes results in things you find upsetting that is your problem, not mine.

...got you the answer I suspected you'd get.

For the pro-control folks, any law is a good law if it's a gun restriction.

Just make this one 400% and call it a day.

who had very little nonLE sales to begin with. Most if not all of the Thompsons and BARs were stolen from police and national guard armories. Dillinger stole his Thompsons from police departments.
http://www.indystar.com/story/news/crime/2016/03/25/indiana-city-wants-dillingers-tommy-gun-back/82246238/

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2014-03-07/news/chi-tommy-gun-stolen-by-dillinger-gang-returned-to-indiana-town-20140307_1_submachine-gun-indiana-town-dillinger-gang

A few mods.

the BAR on the civilian market after the first world war for six grand in today's money. They sold exactly zero. There was some guy in Florida who was a BAR fan like Barrow, can't think of his name.

...until after a stint in prison.

I recall reading that towards the end Bonnie was putting pressure on him to settle down if it was at all possible. She likely knew it wasn't, but she loved kids and wanted her own.

To prison.

That's stood the test of time.

His threats directed towards Hillary using NRA Talking Points make him far too dangerous to be allowed to possess guns.

On this all reasonable people can all agree.

In fact, there's an OP here containing criticism of Trump by a gun control group (CSGV) for his use of a dangerous and threatening NRA talking point against Hillary:

CSGV STATEMENT: Donald Trump's Continued Embrace of Insurrectionism is Deplorable

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1172199466

Gabby Giffords and Mark Kelly call for Trump to apologize over his gun comment regarding Clinton

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1172199384

I was replying to somebody who did bring up Trump, and did so with an blatant right wing falsehood.

But at least all reasonable people can agree that Trump's use of threatening NRA talking points in the course of this presidential campaign against Hillary, behavior called out by various gun control groups as the OPs that I linked to proved, should totally disqualify him from ever being allowed to possess a gun.

So there is no need for anybody to lie about it.

It's the NRA that wants Trump to have guns. Trump is the official NRA candidate.

Here's the NRA's new Trump ad:

Post something that he thinks is so offensive that any vague sort of agreement will get a hide to his credit.

It is odd though. that for all their ranting and raving about the "Evil NRA" all of the posts referencing them and reprinting their stuff come from our gun control friends?

Our control fans have been eager to accuse some of us of being NRA shills.

But they are the ones that are always so eager to post and re-post a lot of NRA propaganda, then "sort of" decry it.

Maybe they are otherwise motivated to post their stuff?

About people staying on topic in his OPs. The hypocrisy is stong

I choose their opinion over yours, so do the courts.

The President and Hillary disagree with you on this.

...where is that point and laugh smiley? Why is it gun opponents seem to miss the idea that almost every leader regardless of party is not a big control fan?