One Unconstitutional Law Implicates Many Gun-Control Regulations

 Laws can be interpreted many ways. We seek guidance from the court to know what is legal and what is not. The US Supreme Court has largely ignored the right to bear arms compared to the number of decisions the court has rendered in other areas. We don’t have enough decisions to draw a clear map of where our rights begin and end. The court recently issued an opinion on the right to bear arms in public. This case redefined the legal landscape and gave us a few rules to go by. Let’s look at the unanswered questions to see if we may draw further conclusions. (Read the rest of this insightful post by friend Rob Morse at Slow Facts.)

Let's apply the spirit of the militia clause . . .

 . . . to the reading of the Second Amendment . . . 

The headline in the Bucks County (PA) Courier Times says that we should apply the spirit of the militia clause to the Second Amendment. I see nothing wrong with the headline, but take issue with the writer's assertions. 

He claims, "In all the years I have been debating and discussing gun control, I have never heard the gun rights advocates refer to the first clause." That sort of statement is akin to my saying, "I have never heard it thunder in Montana." Well, I haven't, but that doesn't mean it hasn't.

 Then he goes on to state the logical fallacies that 

"we can't exclude children from bearing arms" and

CEO's calling for gun bans

 Here is a list of CEO's who are gun banners. Not surprisingly, it includes the CEO's of Dick's Sporting Goods and Levi's. Most of these I am unfamiliar with. 

Why is it that people can't understand that we have a criminal violence problem? IF they were able to ban production from today forward, there is something on the order of half a billion firearms extant in the United States. Those won't go away. 

And, btw, how well has their drug ban worked?

And, btw, how well did their alcohol ban work?

2022 Letter

Dear Members of the Senate:

We, the undersigned CEOs, represent American companies from across the country. Like you, we continue to bear witness to the toll of America’s gun violence epidemic and its impact on our communities.

Another reason Red Flag laws make no sense

 

As I mentioned in a previous post, Red Flag laws, also known as Extreme Risk Protective Orders, (often involving an ex-parte hearing), deprive a person of their legally owned firearms through governmental confiscation. 

This is followed by an expensive uphill battle to regain possession of the firearms.

There are several constitutional reasons that these are bad laws, but some practical reasons, too. When the G-men take a person's firearms, they have no reason or obligation to take his matches, charcoal lighter fluid, or gasoline.

They also do not take vehicles. We learned recently of a vicious multiple victim attack with a vehicle, and a vehicular attack on a woman and child in California, as reported by Fox News.

Screen Grab from Fox News report

What's to keep someone under a Red Flag ban from using a vehicle to do the same? Their good will?

Constitutional Carry bills introduced in 2022

UPDATE 5: Georgia (4/12/22) bill signed, effective immediately.

UPDATE 4: Florida bill is DOA this year. With RINO  friends, who needs enemies?

UPDATE 3: Indiana (7/1/22) got on board (gasp, it includes 18 year-olds*) March 21, 2022.

UPDATE 2: Ohio (6/13/22) became the 23rd state Mar 14, 2022

UPDATE: Alabama (1/1/23) became the 22nd state with Constitutional Carry Mar 10, 2022. 

The year 2022 sees several states having Constitutional (permitless) Carry (CC) bills introduced in their legislatures. These include Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, and Ohio. 

Most Democrats, their media mouthpieces, and an assortment of Rino Republicans can always be counted on to oppose passage of this type of legislation. They have repeatedly used the same old tired arguments that their comrades in other states have used in the past. 

They can be counted on to utter something like, “I support the Second Amendment, but . . .”

They can be counted on to add their military service history and/or

their pro-gun-but credentials to their argument:

“I served in the Marine Corps. I’ve shot everything from an M16 to an M2 .50 caliber machine gun and SMAW rocket launcher. I believe guns are important tools, can offer protection, and serve an important role in our recreational and cultural activities. I believe in the Constitutional right to own a firearm . . . My first gun was given to me when I turned 12. I know this culture. I respect it. I am a part of it.” says Alabama State Rep. Neil Rafferty(D) in AL.com.

But Mr. Rafferty fails in the above quote to mention the Constitutional right to carry a firearm. Perhaps he needs to read the Bill of Rights. Yes, the one that states Congress shall pass no law abridging his freedom of speech, or of the press to publish his opinion (Amendment I). Yes, that same Bill of Rights which states that the right to keep and bear shall not be infringed (Amendment II).

I am sure I could search for a few minutes and find similar opposition to Constitutional Carry in the other states where it has been introduced. But for the sake of brevity, I have seen the same old arguments in states where it has been brought up before. As a matter of fact, I saw the same arguments in Tennessee when permitted carry was first introduced. Then, when legislation was proposed to loosen the restrictions on permitted carry, e.g. carrying into a convenience store, carrying into a restaurant that serves alcohol, and carrying into parks; and in 2021, when a (pseudo) Constitutional Carry bill was introduced and passed.

Perhaps the reason these opposers of freedom fight so hard to hang onto the permitting system is their fondness for the good old antebellum days when white men could freely carry weapons, but slaves had to first get a permission slip from their masters.

Perhaps it is just about power; Do they see themselves as our overlords, and as such, resist every effort to share that power? As I wrote in Ammoland,

 

The problem with many of the elite who are in power these days is that they, like tyrants and petty potentates of old, think power should reside only in the hands of the ruling class.

If unchecked, this always leads to an increasing disparity of power, with this ruling class seizing more and more power from the citizenry.

There are a variety of carry requirements among the states,with some requiring permits, some requiring training, some not requiring training (GA), some allowing permitless open carry (AL, NC), others not; the results are always about the same - -

• Peaceable citizens, with rare exceptions, act responsibly when armed, whether permitted or not.

• The permitting process is a de-facto infringement on the right to bear arms.

• Bad actors with felony convictions or misdemeanor domestic violence offenses often continue to ignore laws and be ongoing bad actors.

• Bad actors, all too frequently, ignore gun-free-zone signs, and continue to kill and maim.

• Most legislators are accessories-before-the-fact, because they continue to mandate gun-free-zones for peaceable citizens, thus creating killing fields for mass-murderers as we have now seen in Florida.

Renting back our rights (to those of us who can afford it) through the permitting process is just one way of exerting their power. Voters need to show them where the power ultimately resides, and fire them.

*Eighteen year-olds who already have every other civil right under the law. They can go to war, vote, marry, and enter into contracts, etc. Good for them

Cooper jumps through the hoop

Click on the picture to look at her slo-mo video.