Lamp Magazine guy: "Gun absolutists have NO good arguments left against sensible restrictions"

1
Archive link: Gun absolutists have NO good arguments left against sensible restrictions
Predictably, the killer used a semi-automatic handgun, a type of weapon the vast majority of civilians don’t need and which is far too easy to obtain in this country.
“Our Constitution explicitly protects gun ownership.” Sort of. What it protects is the right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of membership in a well-regulated militia.
If the Framers had intended to create an unlimited personal right to gun ownership at the federal level, they could have echoed the language of numerous state constitutions at the time or adopted proposals such as the one from New Hampshire ignored by James Madison, which read: “Congress shall never disarm any citizen unless such as are or have been in actual rebellion.”

Re: Lamp Magazine guy: "Gun absolutists have NO good arguments left against sensible restrictions"

3
Not to beat a dead horse, and IANAL, but - for good or for ill - the Framers were not delineating individual rights in the Bill of Rights. They were proscribing limits on the powers of the federal government.

State governments were allowed to regulate religious practice, assembly, speech, the ownership and carriage of arms, etc. as they saw fit up until the passage of the 14th Amendment. All the Second Amendment meant to the founding fathers was the assurance to each state that the other states would not have the power to band together and disarm their militias through federal legislation.

States could, and did, regulate the ownership and carriage of arms under their own constitutions and laws up until the 14th. We are still struggling with the conflict between decades of antebellum precedent and the full incorporation of the Bill of Rights. We should be very leery of the Supreme Court revisiting this topic, as they might just as easily reinterpret the 14th to suppress incorporation as shield individual rights from state regulation.

Re: Lamp Magazine guy: "Gun absolutists have NO good arguments left against sensible restrictions"

7
wings wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 9:03 pm Ignore the word "sensible" - it's flavor text. It has no legal bearing or definition. It's a marketing trick meant to reassure the reader that there is no reason to be alarmed.

Funny thing is, the term can be applied to reasonable proposals. Its use is not a red flag in and of itself.

Ignore it. Parse everything else as if the word sensible did not exist.
It’s also a catch word to mean anything they want. It’s sensible, so we must do “x”. It’s BS.
Image
Image

"Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated!" Loquacious of many. Texas Chapter Chief Cat Herder.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests

cron