California: Large Capacity Magazines legal Again?

So lets limit the 1st and 4 now too
'
If one can be reasonable lets let the others.

You know what, lets edit the 5th while we are at it.

The 19th could be edited to only land owners.

More people are shot with pistols than with spooky evil black rifles with big babnana clip bullets and things that go up.. Originally Posted by Gotyour6

I posted the following on this forum months ago. It is still relavent.

****************************** *******************

When Do We actually Get Our Rights?

California and Florida have raised the age at which a person may buy a firearm from 18 years old to 21.

An interesting line of thought follows from that. How is it that a State can regulate the age when a person is vested with constitutional rights? Which of the protections and grants of the first ten amendments to our Constitution may a person have access to first? What about any of the other amendments, or any provision of the Constitution?

Does a child have the right to free speech for instance? I may be wrong, but I think that has been determined to be the age of majority. For years, adulthood has been defined as 18-21 back and forth. . . .but no older than 21.

BUT: If a State can move the age for any right beyond the age of majority for that state, some three years further along in this instance,, could they not later on make it 35 or 70 years for a firearms purchase? Why mot? What is there to stop that?

Could they do that for any other of the enumerated rights? Given that access to the Second Amendment has already been delayed several years beyond the age of majority in a few states, what about the First Amendment or the Fourth and Fifth? While it may sound unlikely or unreasonable to suggest that, there does not seem to be any legal reason why it could not happen.

Is that what we want?

Think before you vote!

Its the reasonable adult argument , D/L drinking , Mil service ( Mil service has been the benchmark )
However please note all the bill of rights has been under attack for years , the more infringement the more guberment control

ICU - thanks - thoughtful.

I have no doubt the DPST radical lawyers are thinking about using age to suspend the Bill of Rights.

and if the DPST win the Senate and POTUS - they will stack the SC with radicals and support such nonsense you outline above.

i agree with tucker Carlson - the fate of our nation - whether a free representative democracy based on our Constitution survives, or the mob and LSM pitch us into marxism and a dictatorial Orwellian life.

^^ Yupper However the DPST s have been encroaching on the bill of rights for years
The constitution has to survive at all costs So ICU is correct be very carful how you vote

Its the reasonable adult argument , D/L drinking , Mil service ( Mil service has been the benchmark )
However please note all the bill of rights has been under attack for years , the more infringement the more guberment control Originally Posted by rexdutchman

Add in buying cigarettes and in Kansas City, getting a motel room for the night.

Note: Fact that is forgotten the Constitution is for LIMITED GUBERMENT

Agreed - RD - and not the plan of the DPST marxist's - who plan Orwellian control of Amerika./