Is the right to keep and use parachutes a natural right enumerated in the bill of rights?

Sent from Proxima Centauri B through the ether using FTP transmission technology, Honey Encryption, and Peanut Butter & Jelly sandwiches

Yeah. Those damn stairs...

"it's a distraction to the motorists on I-90" was one argument. Loud planes were flown all around Issaquah during the weeks leading up to the election.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

This was more of a profit move. The Holiday Inn and shopping center brings in way more money than a 2 bit air strip.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I was at ISC when the TV crew was there. Filmed some shots outside, then came in and filmed inside. Not surprising the whole bias of the story, especially lately.

Just like the same shit that's been going on in Kitsap county for a while.
Fukin gun haters gotta hate!!!

Glad to see those soccer mom's in favor of supressors. Common sense noise reduction. Now let's get them removed from regulation and available for everyone at the range.

I mean, that is a silly argument here. The 2nd does not mention ranges.

It is entirely more about property rights than anything 2a. Just happens to involve guns.

Shooting ranges being where a citizen can practice the actual shooting part of "bearing arms" is very much tied to and intimate with the rest of 2a. Arguments otherwise are a bit ignorant as to what the 2a is ALL about. The 2a doesn't need to mention ranges, just like it doesn't need to mention hunting or self defense for them to be tied to and intimate with the rest of 2a.

Sent from Proxima Centauri B through the ether using FTP transmission technology, Honey Encryption, and Peanut Butter & Jelly sandwiches

I'd agree that 2A clearly marks out the purpose - a people who are well-practiced in the use of firearms.

We are SO far from that as a national population... Ranges should be protected, and .Gov should be subsidizing them to help maintain a well-practiced citizenry.

A man can dream.

That has nothing to do with the second amendment. It is personal property rights. Same reason someone can ban you from their personal place of business or home.

Noise ordinances are 100% not a second amendment issue, conflating the things is not helpful to our cause. Even bringing it up in court is a bad idea as it could lead to a poor ruling against the second in the end.

There is ZERO counter argument here from a 2nd issue, as it is not impeding your Second Amendment rights. You can shoot your gun elsewhere, if someone chooses not to sell you a firearm is that infringing on your 2nd Amendment rights?


I mean, technically they do with the DNR ranges? Some states take that a step further and have actual maintained places.

That said, I would never shoot at one as I prefer the current count of holes in my body as I have now.

Mkay.



Until there is no "elsewhere" or "elsewhere" is 200 miles away.

I'm not saying these places need to be absolutely protected. I'm saying a gun range by the very fact that practicing responsibly with guns is very much a part of what 2a is about means gun ranges just like gun stores should be treated a little differently than a regular ass mom and pop gas station or skydiving outfit for instance.



Enter tired old strawman argument. You disappoint sir.


Sent from Proxima Centauri B through the ether using FTP transmission technology, Honey Encryption, and Peanut Butter & Jelly sandwiches

You can buy land, you can go elsewhere to shoot. It is false to bring this up as a 2A issue. This is a full stop personal property issue, there were established things in the area that people full well knew about. It is on them.

and as for strawman? Not at all.

If a place of business chooses to NOT sell you a firearm... You can go elsewhere to buy said firearm. If a place is shut down from you shooting... You go someplace else to go shooting. A simile is NOT always a strawman, such as this case.

But root, in this example it would be like the govt saying that you can’t buy a gun at that store anymore, not the store itself saying it.

But as to the main point. A property issue would be a much better play.

Ah, but it would be the court and you as an individual can be denied a gun by due process. You would be dealing with the above property issue also in a court of law.