SMDH. 🤬


https://www.foxnews.com/politics/newsom-proposes-constitutional-amendment-restrict-gun-rights

Zero possibility to go anywhere. On the Second Amendment, some of you will disagree but as I see it the "shall not be infringed upon" means the widespread disarming of the American People. The right of the PEOPLE means more than one however it does not mean any level of government. We all know that through due process of law you can have rights restricted so for example you are a mass murderer, go to court, get 50 years and can never own a gun again. You can't argue the decision is unconstitutional because the right says "shall not be infringed upon". This is sort of a win-win interpretation.
so... The acid test is "Does this disarm everyone?
Example:
1. No one in New York City can own a handgun. Applies to everyone, there is no due process of law. Unconstitutional
2. No one can have a "military" type of small arm (rifle, handgun) that would be a logical choice if the militia was reactivated. Unconstitutional.
3. Bubba in Georgia needs a criminal background check to buy a gun. Effects no one but bubba. Seems okay.
4. Buster is convicted by a jury of a violent crime, can't own a gun any more. Seems okay.
5. The federal government puts a 1000% tax on ammunition making it unavailable to most people. The intent is clearly to stop ammunition sales to everyone. Unconstitutional.
6. Arizona is fed up with the border, the state legislature re-activates the militia, everyone has to put in one weekend a year to absolutely lock down the border- exactly what the Second Amendment is all about, clearly Constitutional There is nothing the federal government can do about it.

A while back I posted the 98 page conclusion of the US Justice Department on the Second Amendment, it pretty much follows this idea and it concludes that "some sort of personal right" has to exist as an enabling means for the American people to be armed so as to have their militia. So once again, a personal right- the boundaries debatable, the widespread ownership by the American People, not debatable, "shall not be infringed upon".

If you interpret things that way, government already has the ability and has already passed such laws. I keep telling people WE ALREADY HAVE GUN CONTROL. Background checks, 3 day waiting periods, big deal to get a concealed carry permit, can't buy a gun and ammunition at the same time, trigger locks, gun safe courses, blah blah.

Garbage

Need "common sense" term limits and "common sense" spending limits.

Nothing but a typical liberal pandering to his mentally ill base. He knows it will never go anywhere - pure theater.

Dave Scott . Well said

We aren't seeing it yet on MSM, but there are more and more politicians pushing back on everything left. CA is so far left Newsome is a nobody!

^^^^^^^

As we saw last week incremental moves are being made.

Small steeps being taken over time.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/new-m...n-issuing-temporary-gun-ban-not-absolute