Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The part about having to keep the gun locked in a safe and unloaded will probably be struck down. Depends on how liberal/activist a court can be drummed up, though. Basically, as long as the firearms you have aren't restricted themselves, the state doesn't have much of a legal leg to stand on when it comes to what you do with your legally owned property in your own home. The other part of this is enforceability. How does the state propose to enforce this law? No-knock warrants/surprise home inspections? This law is idiotic, at best. Unconstitutional, really.
As for regulations on those "assault weapons", this is going to have to be decided by SCOTUS one of these days. Going by their own rulings, we have two somewhat contradictory statements. The first is that the 2nd Amendment can restrict type of weapons. The second is that the 2nd Amendment applies to weapons in "common use". The AR-15 platform/style of gun is definitely in "common use", regardless of how you try to define that term.
The reason I say somewhat contradictory is specifically due to the argument over whether semi-auto rifles are "assault weapons". Obviously machine guns aren't common, and they are regulated. No conflict there. As for the AR-15 and similar looking rifles, their function is really no different than other semi-auto rifles that don't have features like a top rail or pistol grip. If the courts eventually decide that they can be restricted, then by virtue of that ruling, all semi-auto rifles are going to be subject to the same ruling. Then they'll have contradicted their own "common use" ruling.
I'm sure this is a huge reason SCOTUS has so far refused to hear any related cases. They don't want to be seen as 'putting weapons of war on the streets', but they can't well take away all semi-auto rifles, either.
That would be quite the ruling as probably half of all firearms in existence today are semi-auto (one bullet per trigger pull) and that number is growing by a possible million or more each year. Something tells me that 100 million people are not all going to follow any legislation pertaining to their legally purchased firearms. They mostly didn't with the AW ban in 94. Heck, I bought more of them during the ban than after it was lifted.
So County Sheriffs can pick and chose what laws they will enforce as long as they believe in those laws??? You got way bigger problems then gun control Jr.
And that differs from states picking and choosing what federal laws to enforce, to ignore, or worse, to aid individuals in breaking, in what way?
I think all laws should be enforced uniformly. But if we are going to allow communities to pick and choose which laws they want to enforce, then we need to allow citizens that are harmed by that policy to sue the county or city.
I think all laws should be enforced uniformly. But if we are going to allow communities to pick and choose which laws they want to enforce, then we need to allow citizens that are harmed by that policy to sue the county or city.
That is why is someone gets shot or killed in a "gun free" area, the owner of the area should be liable for not allowing anyone to defend themselves.
I think all laws should be enforced uniformly. But if we are going to allow communities to pick and choose which laws they want to enforce, then we need to allow citizens that are harmed by that policy to sue the county or city.
When laws interfere with rights, we the people should break those laws and not care.
I'll just put down TwoByFour as someone who would be okay with the fugitive slave act. Didn't want to do it but you felt you owed it to them, right?
That would be quite the ruling as probably half of all firearms in existence today are semi-auto (one bullet per trigger pull) and that number is growing by a possible million or more each year. Something tells me that 100 million people are not all going to follow any legislation pertaining to their legally purchased firearms. They mostly didn't with the AW ban in 94. Heck, I bought more of them during the ban than after it was lifted.
Question for you... how long do you think SCOTUS can put off ruling on this? By my count, we now have WA, CA, MD, NJ, NY, MA and CT with new (or new-ish) laws on the books specifically about 'assault weapons'. Any others I missed? How many other states might have to screw over their citizens before we get a ruling? We may see an Oregon ban, Delaware tried and failed, but they might be successful in the near future. I'm betting Colorado will be the deciding state. Denver and Boulder have already passed 'assault weapons' bans, but if the entire state crosses that line, I think the courts will have to finally answer.
They (the court) also keep putting off Peruta, with no explanation.
Democrats are saying to not only have their states and cities not enforce federal law, but to actively not cooperate with federal law enforcement officials.
It is a road to anarchy. It is John C. Calhoun all over again.
An anarchist open bordered welfare state. Doesn't get more dysfunctional than that.
Question for you... how long do you think SCOTUS can put off ruling on this? By my count, we now have WA, CA, MD, NJ, NY, MA and CT with new (or new-ish) laws on the books specifically about 'assault weapons'. Any others I missed? How many other states might have to screw over their citizens before we get a ruling? We may see an Oregon ban, Delaware tried and failed, but they might be successful in the near future. I'm betting Colorado will be the deciding state. Denver and Boulder have already passed 'assault weapons' bans, but if the entire state crosses that line, I think the courts will have to finally answer.
They (the court) also keep putting off Peruta, with no explanation.
I think they'll have to soon. But, the longer they wait the more common use they become. Honestly, I don't know what they are waiting for because the house of cards of unconstitutional laws will come crashing down.
Maybe that is the game plan. When the semi auto is the most common firearm it makes it easy to rule.
Last edited by 1AngryTaxPayer; 02-17-2019 at 12:54 PM..
The right to bear arms is addressed in the US and each and every of the State Constitutions. There is no right to violate immigration law.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
