An assault weapons ban is picking up steam in the House and on the 2020 campaign trail...And how are we defining 'assault weapons' this time?
...nearly 200 House Democrats have now signed on to legislation... banning semi-automatic firearms and large-capacity magazines. With 198 co-sponsors, the bill is just 20 votes shy of the number needed to push it through the lower chamber.Oh. All semi-automatic firearms, which includes the most popular pistols and rifles in America.
The Heller standard is that the Second Amendment protects firearms that are in common use for lawful purposes. This approach seems to have adopted the same category that the Supreme Court declared protected to be the first thing to ban. You can call that what you like, but 'common sense' it is not. 'Common sense' means that people have the sense in common. When people differ this sharply, there's no common sense to which to refer.
9 comments:
Not just banning them--whatever they are. Robert Francis has become the second Progressive-Democratic Party Presidential candidate to call for the confiscation of them--with some payment, but confiscation, nonetheless.
Eric Hines
Why would a serious major party just dink around the outside edges when they could put forward a proposal to repeal the 2nd amendment? All this court-packing and re-definition stuff is just pretending the constitution doesn't mean anything.
And if THAT's the case, why would anybody respect emanations and penumbras thereof?
Run on the amendment process, and see how many people and legislatures vote to ratify.
... to call for the confiscation of them--with some payment, but confiscation, nonetheless.
Come and get 'em. Bring the money.
Run on the amendment process, and see how many people and legislatures vote to ratify.
Yeah. My concealed carry permit is recognized in 39 states.
That's the very point. They don't dare try to repeal the Second, because they know it stands zero chance. Instead they eat away at the edges (so they think) claiming it's "common sense" gun control (when it's no such thing). Thus it becomes law until successfully challenged in the Courts. And I fully believe that if the SCOTUS doesn't rule as they like, and they get a Democrat in office, they WILL attempt to pack the Court. And at that time, I daresay, they're going to find exactly how serious the tens of millions of gun owners actually are.
By the way, SCOTUS (in an old ruling) declared that the 2A means Americans may own 'any bearable weapon.' That makes the ban on machine guns unconstitutional. However, SCOTUS--at that time--had specifically NOT 'incorporated' the 2A.
Banning guns from Demoncrat criminals, gangers, and political staffers would not be a bad move in the long term.
The Alt Right might do the fire vs fire, poison vs poison thing, given that the Constitution is not exactly holding the line any more.
Also, a hidden secret nobody talks about (apparently) is that if you banned Hollywood's guns... they would be hurting. And they have a lot more than "assault rifles". They like to use real guns, you know.
... to call for the confiscation of them--with some payment, but confiscation, nonetheless.
Come and get 'em. Bring the money.
Yeah. We'll fight in the shade of the money.
Eric Hines
I am just reading "We Die Alone", David Howarth.
A story of a Norwegian resistance fighter being inserted into the country in 1943 and his desperate attempt to escape after the plan went sideways. The atrocities of the Germans on the Norwegian citizens are an effective lesson on what happens when one is disarmed. This stuff is always in the back of my mind, all the stories from all the hellholes are filed there, but there is nothing like a refresher lesson in evil. The writer refused to say how the man's captured comrades died, saying "it was not fit for speech or print". He was almost bewildered why they would use such means to execute, and keep it a tight secret- in the end, he said the only reason possible was that the executioners enjoyed sadism.
Those are the stakes- do not give up weapons.
Post a Comment