Supreme Court Rules On Law Barring Illegal Drugs Users From Having Guns
(kprcradio.iheart.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (10)
sorted by:
The Supreme Court has unanimously ruled that a federal law banning illegal drug users from possessing firearms violated the constitutional rights of a Texas man who regularly used marijuana. The decision, delivered Thursday (June 18), marks a significant interpretation of the Second Amendment as it applies to gun ownership and drug use.
I have always viewed the laws taking away the rights of people that have committed some 'felony' as ignoring the 2nd Amendments 'shall not be infringed' clause. What part of the 2A says they can take your rights for making a screw up? In my opinion this SC ruling is in line with what the founding fathers intended.
If you were someone that is of concern to the government because you will not conform to their tyranny it is easy for them to stick a charge on you, and take away your rights to keep and bear arms so they have the upper hand. The founding fathers understood tyranny. They did not intend the government have the upper hand over the citizens.
It is a slippery slope - it doesnt take much to get on law enforcement's bad side. I know 2 people with bad relationships which led to exes who were "afraid" because the guys had guns - red flag laws allowed the cops to come and confiscate their guns while everything got "sorted out." Bottom line with both guys is the threats were not proven but they only got back some of their firearms - none of the guns that were not registered or were modified were returned. What I learned / dont keep your eggs in one basket, keep your inventory private and stay away from crazy - have heard of neighbors who felt "threatened" because someone next door had guns that used red flag laws also.