As a non American, it seems to me that allowing government to restrict (through the use of permits/regulations) the right of citizens to bear arms is contrary to the 2A, which is there to protect the citizens from that self-same government.
What I can't reconcile is the need to restrict firearms to known criminals with a history of violence. I happen to agree with this restriction, but it also seems to go against the 2A.
Anyone more familiar with the situation care to comment on this one?
What started off as just "common sense" "prohibiting violent felons with a history of using a gun to commit a crime", has grown exponentially.
As our government has been busy criminalizing it's citizens with mountains of statute and criminal code, while at the same time expanding the prohibited class of illegal gun ownership, the rights of the 2nd amendment has been restricted to a particular class of people by design.
To your question in particular, felons are suppose to loose their constitutional right of the 2nd even after they have served their time. They also loose the right to vote.
In my opinion it's all unconstitutional, every single restrictive law passed after the ink dryed on the constitution is illegal.
Shall not be Infringed
current list of prohibited class, excluding red flag laws.(If the government takes your guns away, it doesn't matter what they call it).
convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year;
who is a fugitive from justice;
who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act, codified at 21 U.S.C. § 802);
who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution;
who is an illegal alien;
who has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions;
who has renounced his or her United States citizenship;
who is subject to a court order restraining the person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or child of the intimate partner; or
who has been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.
If that is the expected ruling by the SC, then it is time to short gun stocks. What has driven the mass purchases of guns is the constant chatter about limiting someone's ability to buy a gun. The best spokesperson for the gun industry has been and still is B. Hussein Obama.
SO FAR, it's not a felony to disagree with your government.
So why are felons striped of their GOD given rights?
It's like everyone is owed a fair trial, even if you KNOW that they are guilty.
They have a right to a trial by jury of their peers. ONE LAW for EVERYONE!
even if a KNOWN murderer gets away with it.
BTW, i've never been arrested, just so you know my bias.
My position has always been, either they are too dangerous to be a part of society, or they have paid their debt / proven themselves rehabilitated, and deserve to be reintegrated as productive members. This shit of turning people that we know are going to fail loose, with what amounts to a constitutional learners permit, and hoping for the best is ridiculous.
The commies/fascists hate guns, but, abortion is the Holy Sacrament and they will go WaCkO when/if this is official.
As a non American, it seems to me that allowing government to restrict (through the use of permits/regulations) the right of citizens to bear arms is contrary to the 2A, which is there to protect the citizens from that self-same government.
What I can't reconcile is the need to restrict firearms to known criminals with a history of violence. I happen to agree with this restriction, but it also seems to go against the 2A.
Anyone more familiar with the situation care to comment on this one?
What started off as just "common sense" "prohibiting violent felons with a history of using a gun to commit a crime", has grown exponentially.
As our government has been busy criminalizing it's citizens with mountains of statute and criminal code, while at the same time expanding the prohibited class of illegal gun ownership, the rights of the 2nd amendment has been restricted to a particular class of people by design.
To your question in particular, felons are suppose to loose their constitutional right of the 2nd even after they have served their time. They also loose the right to vote.
In my opinion it's all unconstitutional, every single restrictive law passed after the ink dryed on the constitution is illegal.
Shall not be Infringed
current list of prohibited class, excluding red flag laws.(If the government takes your guns away, it doesn't matter what they call it).
If the SC follows the Constitution, there will be zero changes to the rights of citizens to bear arms of any kind.
If that is the expected ruling by the SC, then it is time to short gun stocks. What has driven the mass purchases of guns is the constant chatter about limiting someone's ability to buy a gun. The best spokesperson for the gun industry has been and still is B. Hussein Obama.
We will have to see what happens, but do I trust SCOTUS to do what is right and follow the Constitution implicitly? NO!
SO FAR, it's not a felony to disagree with your government. So why are felons striped of their GOD given rights? It's like everyone is owed a fair trial, even if you KNOW that they are guilty. They have a right to a trial by jury of their peers. ONE LAW for EVERYONE! even if a KNOWN murderer gets away with it.
BTW, i've never been arrested, just so you know my bias.
My position has always been, either they are too dangerous to be a part of society, or they have paid their debt / proven themselves rehabilitated, and deserve to be reintegrated as productive members. This shit of turning people that we know are going to fail loose, with what amounts to a constitutional learners permit, and hoping for the best is ridiculous.
I would like to be in the room with Schumer & AOC when their HEADS explode!!!
These 2 will come out with a diatribe so disgusting that anything ANYONE says will just add fuel to the fire....😎😂😁🤣
Now about that NY amendment ... the NY legislature will go back and right another amendment and THAT amendment still won't pass the SC!!!!!