But they can be owned

you dont think that to be legalistic semantics?

No, because those are two different real life scenarios

One of them means you can own an M2, and the other means you can't

you dont see how that wording "I never said you couldn't **own** guns nyuk nyuk" could be manipulated?

that's how my 14 year old brother gets out of doing chores

How can it be manipulated? It's how the system currently works

There is an entire class of firearms that you will not own, and legally can't own, but there are some people that own them

i was referencing if Dems made the gun ban similar to Prohibition, "it doesn't say you can't own guns just that you can't own/buy/sell/shoot a gun with more than 10 rounds per magazine, own/buy/sell/shoot a gun with a vertical handle, own/buy/sell/shoot a gun that can be concealed, own/buy/sell/shoot a gun that can be modified, own/buy/sell/shoot a gun that shoots more than 2 bullets per sec, own/buy/sell/shoot a gun blah blah blah. but you can go have your bolt action rifle [sneer]"

That violates 2a regardless

Current legislation also does

@Beemann, @Deleted User,
Drinking was fine, selling was not, but possession was also illegal.
PS; Daetslov is Volstead backwards. (Jesus fucking Christ, ***THAT'S*** how I know...)

New topic...
You can buy a new M-2 (¿BMG or Carbine btw?), but to take ownership you must have a Class 3 licence and pay an unholy tax (one of the things I hope to rectify with Daetslov).

Dems don't give af about 2a

I cant find any document showing that possession was criminalized, nor would it make sense for drinking to be fine if possession is criminal.

Right, so make sure they have to

well should we find someonw who lived back then we can ask

Theyre all ded, at least anyone who was old enough to remember proper

https://www.loc.gov/law/help/statutes-at-large/66th-congress/session-1/c66s1ch85.pdf
Sorry, it's a .off and I can't download on my phone. 😒

Interesting, so it was specifically ownership of recreational use alcohol, with permits covering all other instances

There was even *a religious exemption.*

Silly capitalist, there was no Holodomor, it was all bad weather.

That said, there is no other government system that is so known for being incompetent that claiming bad weather is actually a compelling claim.

I know, i remember the last time a drought killed millions of Americans

favorite parts of the day

1. alcohol prohibition didnt mean people couldnt have and drinkl alcohol

2. we dont know if it did because those people are dead and we dont have any records

pretend we dont have more written records regarding the period than we do for all of the assyrian empire

its a mystery

if only you could read beyond a headline. That would be a nifty skill to have :^)

yeah, alcohol prohibition was just a headline

it really meant you could still have and drink all the booze you want

>he didnt read the legislation
>he didnt read the gallup polling

millions of dollars spent going after booze, thousands of photos of government agents dumping booze into sewers

worse gang crime in history based solely on the illegal distribution of booze

because people were allowed to drink all they wanted

>moving the goalposts

imagine being that fucking retarded you thought someone would believe your lies

its your fucking words dude

and actually, as mandatory pointed out, drinking it in and of itself wasnt prohibited. Ownership was restricted but not eliminated

it's not