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.
Gun Rights V Public Safety is one of the forever debates between the Reps and Dems. The same can be said of many talking points that are dragged out in the lead up to elections. We are now looking at Abortion Rights and of course the forever issue of Illegal Immigration which now thanks to Biden has become a crisis.
Looking at these hot button topics there is a major difference in them Gun Rights is in our Constitution but there is nothing about Illegal Immigration or Abortion and that is why the Right for a citizen to own a gun cannot be denied.
Being new to the topic, Its interesting the descrepency between the first amendment and 2nd Amendments in the US. Apparently the second if it really the right "shall not be infringed" yet we have thousands of gun laws federal, state, and local restricting such "right." Its also an easy way to earn a felony to be caught making a little mistake with a gun even if its never brandished let alone fired near people. I guess the "Well Regulated Militia" clause gave them the right to regulate it with thousands of laws.
Apparenently it appears those "less free" on gun rights parts of the world doesn't have nearly as many laws on guns.
Being new to the topic, Its interesting the descrepency between the first amendment and 2nd Amendments in the US. Apparently the second if it really the right "shall not be infringed" yet we have thousands of gun laws federal, state, and local restricting such "right." Its also an easy way to earn a felony to be caught making a little mistake with a gun even if its never brandished let alone fired near people. I guess the "Well Regulated Militia" clause gave them the right to regulate it with thousands of laws.
Apparenently it appears those "less free" on gun rights parts of the world doesn't have nearly as many laws on guns.
OK, folks, here is my $0.02:
1. The 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution is written in a murky language. What the heck is this "militia" and how it relates to our right to keep and bear arms? This question has been debated for decades. If not for that militia language, things would have been much simpler.
2. The US Constitution is not just the original document itself, but also all the court cases dealing with its application in practice -- probably hundreds of thousands pages long. So it's up to the Supreme Court to clear the mess and establish the applicability of the original language related to gun rights. They seem to be moving in that direction.
3. The same applies to any other right stated in the Constitution. Freedom of speech? Just try it. Freedom to assemble? Apparently not in all cases (see Jan. 6). Viewed through the lens of the original Constitution, the power of most of the Departments and Federal regulations are not found in the original text. And yet here they are -- including the OP's ATF. The smart lawyers and functionaries have justified all the Gov't growth under the language of "regulating state commerce." In reality, the US today has a very tentative connection to our Constitution. It will be a long road back.
It's the difference between the uniparty vs populists. Establishment politicians care about power whereas populist Republicans uphold actual Republican values.
...more specifically, 'Constitutional Values' (which means Government Hands off)~
Being new to the topic, Its interesting the descrepency between the first amendment and 2nd Amendments in the US. Apparently the second if it really the right "shall not be infringed" yet we have thousands of gun laws federal, state, and local restricting such "right." Its also an easy way to earn a felony to be caught making a little mistake with a gun even if its never brandished let alone fired near people. I guess the "Well Regulated Militia" clause gave them the right to regulate it with thousands of laws.
Apparenently it appears those "less free" on gun rights parts of the world doesn't have nearly as many laws on guns.
As per the last part of your post , while the USA indeed tends to have the most liberal legislation overall concerning firearms than any other country ( besides perhaps Yemen ) in the world , there are indeed certain restrictions in the USA that are quite peculiar elsewhere .
A good example of this is the lifetime automatic ban on purchasing/owning/possessing/using firearms that gets placed on all convicted felons , a thing that doesn't exist throughout Europe .
Of course I can only speak for the countries I'm most familiar with , but I know for a fact that in Slovakia/Hungary/Croatia one's gun ownership rights are actually restored after the local equivalent of a US felony conviction legally expires so to speak , which usually takes no more than five years .
Also in Hungary ignorance of the law is interestingly enough a valid reason for acquittal at trial when it comes to simple illegal firearms possession offenses , with Croatia being an even better country in this regard since the maximum penalty for firearms offenses which don't relate to major trafficking cases amounts to six months in jail if I remember correctly .
It's really no wonder that so many Croatians still have fully automatic Zastavas stashed away at home , since being caught with one can easily amount to nothing more than a fine , while committing the same offense over in the States can theoretically result in a 10 year prison sentence if this source is correct :
We all know, Republicans claim to support citizens gun rights and the 2A...and that Democrats feel basically the opposite and want more gun control...right?
OK, so why have the major ATF gun laws remained pretty much the same for MANY MANY years now, (thru out plenty of Republican AND Democrat controlled terms)?
If the two parties truly felt so different on this issue, should we not see significant gun law changes every time power changes hands?
It seems to me, the ATF has control over these laws for the most part? What is really odd about these Federal gun laws...state and even local law enforcement, (almost EVERYWHERE in the country), aggressively enforce 'federal' gun laws every chance they get!!? That doesnt sound logical, does it? One would assume, there would be at least a few cities, states, that simply refuse to comply with federal gun laws? Or compliance would change at the state/ local level, depending on which party has power at any given time...but federal gun laws appear to be aggressively enforced ALL THE TIME, despite which party holds power, at the Federal, state and local levels???(Maybe Im wrong and there are some out there?) If anyone can name some I would definitely appreciate it.
Gun laws haven't changed much because both Dems and Republicans know that actually passing significantly more restrictive gun legislation would be political suicide. Dems yap about a lot of stuff in a surprisingly effective attempt to woo low-information voters, but they don't mean most of it. It's just political posturing and bloviating. I'm surprised people still fall for this tactic. Perfect example: Dems pontificate endlessly about helping Blacks while simultaneously having spent the last 4 decades doing irreparable damage to Black communities.
The only thing about guns laws that surprises me is that states are even allowed to enforce their own gun laws. Guns are clearly in the domain of the federal government. The states have zero Constitutional basis to enact gun legislation, which has created a situation where one could go from being a law-abiding citizen to a criminal merely by crossing over a state line. That's BS and needs to be fixed. Then you have nanny states like mine that have a "may issue" carry policy. Since when did Constitutional rights become optional? There's no "may" in the equation.
Last edited by YourWakeUpCall; 05-06-2022 at 06:16 PM..
ATF doesn't "have control over these laws", in that they don't write the laws or pass them. That is the function of congress. ATF has responsibility for enforcement of them. And they fail to do their jobs. Trying to buy a gun when knowingly banned from doing so is a felony, and buying one for someone else is a felony. Further, buying a gun if you use pot or any other controlled substance is illegal. Yet these laws are almost never enforced and violators are never punished. Gun laws were not passed to reduce crime, in fact they help criminals by disarming their potential victims.
That cannot be accurate though!
Power has changed hands in Congress numerous times over the years...yet these laws remain the same!
Please explain how two entirely different political parties can win/loose power multiple times, but a law they disagree on so fiercely, remains the same?!
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.
