# At The Demonstartion Against The NRA. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 20, 2018, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/at-the-demonstartion-against-the-nra/812805 "2018-04-20T18:27:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 85
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2018, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/at-the-demonstartion-against-the-nra/812805/85 "2018-04-21T18:46:08Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > So you can possess, today, any weapon you want as a private citizen? > [@Explain please.](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-please/786875/37): > > My personal rule is that when a poster starts a response with “so” and then follows with some conclusion or interpretation it’s almost always not an accurate summation. I don’t know what I would name this rule, but there’s got to be something clever sounding. \* “Bone’s ‘so I’m wrong’ rule”?\* You’re wrong. Both the quoted post about “any weapon” and your view that: > [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Let’s see what else the SCOTUS said: > … > So we can ban all weapons except the guns you could buy in 1791. I’m ok with that. Caetano forecloses your view completely. > [@Taber](#): > > Are you also like a racist if you think abortion is unconstitutional or is Caetano the only case where you are like a racist if you disagree with the Supreme court? Facts not in evidence. But if someone argues that the law of the land is something that is completely ruled out by existing and current precedent, then that would be like arguing abortion is unconstitutional, or separate but equal is allowable. All of those positions are not the current law. --- _[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/at-the-demonstartion-against-the-nra/812805)._