In response to:

Bloomberg on Unarmed Sandy Hook Principal: "I Don't Know What A Gun Would Have Done"

spartacus3344 Wrote: Dec 17, 2012 3:27 PM
"Sparticus says there are limits to what arms are covered in the 2nd amendment" I'm assuming you meant me? If so, I said no such thing, and the dconstitution doesn't limit anything. What limits ownership of an ICBM is the availability and the price tag. There is no reason a law abding citizen shouldn't be allowed to own whatever they want. The framers didn't consider those weapons, but notice they didn't put any limits as to what we can own? No where in the constitution does it say I can own 10 semi-auto rifles?? And you take this to mean they "forbid" the ownership of 10 rifles?
spartacus3344 Wrote: Dec 17, 2012 3:27 PM
Also, you don't understand the constitution. The constitution doesn't grant rights, it affirms them. Meaning the framers put in writing the rights we wewre bestowed upon us by our creator.

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who politicized the Sandy Hook tragedy within hours last Friday, just wrapped up a press conference announcing new plans to fight gun violence and to counter the National Rifle Association with his own Super PAC. Bloomberg was asked by a reporter to respond to Rep. Louie Gohmert's comments over the weekend that he wished the principal of the school, who died trying to take down shooter Adam Lanza, had a gun. Bloomberg responded by saying, "There are dumb statements and then there are stupid statements.....I don't know what the gun would have...