Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire What restrictions on 2nd amendment to you consider reasonable or unreasonable?

Those were illustrations of the principle that we don't punish based on the egregiousness of the outcome but rather the level of fault. The level of fault belonging to a truly insane person (e.g., someone with a high fever who believes, due to delirium, that he's killing a grizzly bear with a butcher's knife that's attacking his toddler, but in reality is attacking his mother-in-law with said butcher's knife who was merely changing his toddler's diapers) is closer to example 2 than 1, i.e., the punishment in a criminal case should fit the level of fault, not the level of damage caused. This is what the insanity defense is meant to address.

Exactly.

Sorry, just can't lay low on this goddam nonsense,.....you had it right, in the FIRST response to this POS, RIDICULOUSLY titled post,.......

Look at the endless "Angels dancing on the head of a pin", horsechit, verbose, and bloviate text that have ensued.

As more than a few others have already asked this OP,.....WTF can't you understand what it means, in it's original context, STFU, and leave it alone ?

These [bleep] "Compromisers" have gotten this Country backed in the corner it finds itself into now.

Enough !

GTC

Jeeesh! What a grouch!

So what is the rationale reason to even consider "restrictions" on any Constitutional right . . . let alone the 2nd Amendment? The OP "begs the question."