Controlling firearms

[the last yatto]

Had an idea how to control firearms in america that would hold up in court.

Gun nuts usually talk about their god given right to bear arms, ignoring the fact the bill of right passage doesn't say anything like that.

Anyways to the point, could you in theory ban owning a firearm unless you were registered with a state milita?

[Telarus]

No, the Supremes ruled on that in 08 and this year.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution#District_of_Columbia_v._Heller

The Supreme Court, in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 290 (2008), ruled as follows:

The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home....The District's ban on handgun possession in the home violates the Second Amendment, as does its prohibition against rendering any lawful firearm in the home operable for the purpose of immediate self-defense.
This was a landmark decision.[162][163][164][165] To clarify that its ruling does not invalidate a broad range of existing firearm laws, the majority opinion, written by Justice Scalia, said:[166]

Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment, nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.[167]

The majority opinion held that the amendment's prefatory clause (referencing the "militia") serves to clarify the operative clause (referencing "the people"), but does not limit the scope of the operative clause, because "the 'militia' in colonial America consisted of a subset of 'the people'...."

-------------------------
So, basically, you have to read the 2nd amendment:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

like this:

[the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.] Because -> [A well regulated Militia, (is) necessary to the security of a free State,]

[Adios]

I like guns and have no desire to allow anyone to control my ownership of firearms.

[the last yatto]

 I see it like you need state issued paperwork to drive your car.
Why not for firearms? Having an civilian authority issuing permits membership cards would be eaiser then having a federal database to check for felons or mentally ill. Would provide training and act as a balance incase the army wishes to take them away.

[Adios]

I see it like you need state issued paperwork to drive your car.
Why not for firearms? Having an civilian authority issuing permits membership cards would be eaiser then having a federal database to check for felons or mentally ill. Would provide training and act as a balance incase the army wishes to take them away.

You ask why not. I ask why.

[Jasper]

That's why lots of states (I think all) have some kind of gun ownership license.  

Basically, the problem with any kind of dramatic legal sanction against needless gun ownership is that it will just drive gun people underground, creating (more of) a black market, and creating positions of power for organized crime.

Imposition of order, and all that.  

[Requia ☣]

I see it like you need state issued paperwork to drive your car.
Why not for firearms? Having an civilian authority issuing permits membership cards would be eaiser then having a federal database to check for felons or mentally ill. Would provide training and act as a balance incase the army wishes to take them away.

Because I don't want to pay 400$ to be told I can't buy a 200$ gun because I don't have enough political connections (as per the New York licensing scheme).

[BabylonHoruv]

That's why lots of states (I think all) have some kind of gun ownership license.  

Basically, the problem with any kind of dramatic legal sanction against needless gun ownership is that it will just drive gun people underground, creating (more of) a black market, and creating positions of power for organized crime.

Imposition of order, and all that.  

states have concealed carry licenses, those are different from actual gun licenses.

[Jasper]

Hm.


CA requires a "Handgun Safety Certificate" in order to legally purchase a gun at all.

[Doktor Howl]

Had an idea how to control firearms in america that would hold up in court.

Gun nuts usually talk about their god given right to bear arms, ignoring the fact the bill of right passage doesn't say anything like that.

Anyways to the point, could you in theory ban owning a firearm unless you were registered with a state milita?

Of course it says that, if you can parse a sentence.

And the answer, according to SCOTUS is no, there are no group rights, only individual ones.

And stay the fuck away from my rights.

Dok,
Gun nut.

[Doktor Howl]

I see it like you need state issued paperwork to drive your car.
Why not for firearms? Having an civilian authority issuing permits membership cards would be eaiser then having a federal database to check for felons or mentally ill. Would provide training and act as a balance incase the army wishes to take them away.

I think we should take away your right to freely associate.

Unless you get a license for each friend.

[the last yatto]

isn't that the status quo if you look different

[Dysfunctional Cunt]

Had an idea how to control firearms in america that would hold up in court.

Gun nuts usually talk about their god given right to bear arms, ignoring the fact the bill of right passage doesn't say anything like that.

Anyways to the point, could you in theory ban owning a firearm unless you were registered with a state milita?

Of course it says that, if you can parse a sentence.

And the answer, according to SCOTUS is no, there are no group rights, only individual ones.

And stay the fuck away from my rights.

Dok,
Gun nut.

I'm not a gun nut, though I like them just fine and can shoot so don't piss me off.  However, it is my right to protect myself and my family and since they will not legally sell me a grenade launcher, then a gun is my next option.  Of course I could always go to the fucking hardware store and buy myself a fucking flamethrower.  Would that be better???

I agree with Dok, stay the fuck away from my rights......

Because the hardware store is right down the damn street.

[LMNO]

In that case, gun ownership should be ENFORCED.  If it's a right, you should be properly educated in your rights.  Every school should have a gun range, and every student should take gun safety classes.

If we're not going to reduce the amount of guns in the country, we need to increase the public's awareness and respect of guns, what they do, and how they do it.  The right to own a gun does not mean you have right to be an ignorant sack of shit and accidentally shoot your daughter because you didn't know what the fuck you were doing.

[Mangrove]

In that case, gun ownership should be ENFORCED.  If it's a right, you should be properly educated in your rights.  Every school should have a gun range, and every student should take gun safety classes.

If we're not going to reduce the amount of guns in the country, we need to increase the public's awareness and respect of guns, what they do, and how they do it.  The right to own a gun does not mean you have right to be an ignorant sack of shit and accidentally shoot your daughter because you didn't know what the fuck you were doing.

Someone (serious pro-gun dude) said something to the effect of:

"Because of the gun laws here, there's a lot of people with permits to carry a concealed weapon, so you're statistically, much safer in this state. Criminals fear nothing else like an off duty cop with a gun!"

I said:

"Actually, it is a prevalence of skill, not the prevalence of firearms that contributes to safety. I know other people who really love their guns, but I wouldn't rely on them if 'shit went down' and they needed to shoot in a defensive situation because they don't practice."

He said that there's been lots of shooting ranges closed down in this state. I felt that showed lack of interest on the part of gun owners who meet the minimal requirement to get a permit and then do nothing else. If there was a high demand for CT gun owners to be shooting regularly, someone would certainly emerge to profit from it.