Gun Control Compromise

[2aguy]

I see lefties frequently screech about how 2A supporters refuse to compromise. Well, that's because there's never BEEN a compromise, rather a one-sided chipping away of 2nd Amendment rights with nothing offered in return.

So here, I'll offer an actual compromise. You lefties want universal background checks? I can get behind that. But in exchange I want universal reciprocity on CCW permits.

Deal?

This is a lie – as ignorant as it is wrong.

There has been no ‘chipping away’ of Second Amendment rights, ‘one sided’ or otherwise.

Indeed, it was a Republican-appointed, conservative Supreme Court majority that reaffirmed the fact that the Second Amendment right is not unlimited and subject to regulation and restrictions by government.

And the courts have determined that current firearm regulatory measures are perfectly consistent with the Second Amendment, in no manner ‘chipping away’ at that right.

Everything you just posted is wrong and inaccurate.

The limits are some buildings, felons and the dangerously mentally ill...AR-15 rifles and standard magazines are protected by the 2nd Amendment, and lower courts ignoring the Heller, McDonald, Caetano, Miller rulings from the Supreme Court are breaking the law, not upholding the law.

It is a national disgrace that the courts do not apply the same strict scrutiny on our right to keep and bear arms like they apply strict scrutiny to all individual rights.

Most gun control laws are unconstitutional.

I suspect that once the old bag dies and Trump gets to appoint a clear Conservative majority Supreme Court there will be a flood of cases to corrupt the oppression that we see.

Except for Roberts...he is the left wing fly in the ointment.......

 

[progressive hunter]

I see lefties frequently screech about how 2A supporters refuse to compromise. Well, that's because there's never BEEN a compromise, rather a one-sided chipping away of 2nd Amendment rights with nothing offered in return.

So here, I'll offer an actual compromise. You lefties want universal background checks? I can get behind that. But in exchange I want universal reciprocity on CCW permits.

Deal?

This is a lie – as ignorant as it is wrong.

There has been no ‘chipping away’ of Second Amendment rights, ‘one sided’ or otherwise.

Indeed, it was a Republican-appointed, conservative Supreme Court majority that reaffirmed the fact that the Second Amendment right is not unlimited and subject to regulation and restrictions by government.

And the courts have determined that current firearm regulatory measures are perfectly consistent with the Second Amendment, in no manner ‘chipping away’ at that right.

Everything you just posted is wrong and inaccurate.

The limits are some buildings, felons and the dangerously mentally ill...AR-15 rifles and standard magazines are protected by the 2nd Amendment, and lower courts ignoring the Heller, McDonald, Caetano, Miller rulings from the Supreme Court are breaking the law, not upholding the law.

It is a national disgrace that the courts do not apply the same strict scrutiny on our right to keep and bear arms like they apply strict scrutiny to all individual rights.

Most gun control laws are unconstitutional.

I suspect that once the old bag dies and Trump gets to appoint a clear Conservative majority Supreme Court there will be a flood of cases to corrupt the oppression that we see.

all gun laws are unconstitutional

The difference between "most" and "all" is very minimal in my opinion.

I suspect that if our Founding Fathers were sitting in a pub and drafting out the Second Amendment over lunch and there was a drunk banishing a gun they would disarm him and then go back to protecting our rights to keep and bear arms.

as like with the 1st A,,, the 2nd protects us from the government not from the guy sitting next to us

and as for the mentally ill, its a due process that is used to declare a person unfit for possession not the government

 

[eflatminor]

I reject your deal. No, I'm taking the approach of all those leftists that tell us healthcare is a right. Of course, no one is stopping anyone from seeking healthcare, so what they really mean is forcing me to pay for their healthcare is their right. Well, healthcare is not mentioned as a right in the Constitution, but firearms are. Ergo, since I'm being forced to pay for others healthcare, I want subsidies to buy a new shotgun.

Deal?

 

[Daryl Hunt]

This is a lie – as ignorant as it is wrong.

There has been no ‘chipping away’ of Second Amendment rights, ‘one sided’ or otherwise.

Indeed, it was a Republican-appointed, conservative Supreme Court majority that reaffirmed the fact that the Second Amendment right is not unlimited and subject to regulation and restrictions by government.

And the courts have determined that current firearm regulatory measures are perfectly consistent with the Second Amendment, in no manner ‘chipping away’ at that right.

Everything you just posted is wrong and inaccurate.

The limits are some buildings, felons and the dangerously mentally ill...AR-15 rifles and standard magazines are protected by the 2nd Amendment, and lower courts ignoring the Heller, McDonald, Caetano, Miller rulings from the Supreme Court are breaking the law, not upholding the law.

It is a national disgrace that the courts do not apply the same strict scrutiny on our right to keep and bear arms like they apply strict scrutiny to all individual rights.

Most gun control laws are unconstitutional.

I suspect that once the old bag dies and Trump gets to appoint a clear Conservative majority Supreme Court there will be a flood of cases to corrupt the oppression that we see.

all gun laws are unconstitutional

The difference between "most" and "all" is very minimal in my opinion.

I suspect that if our Founding Fathers were sitting in a pub and drafting out the Second Amendment over lunch and there was a drunk banishing a gun they would disarm him and then go back to protecting our rights to keep and bear arms.

as like with the 1st A,,, the 2nd protects us from the government not from the guy sitting next to us

and as for the mentally ill, its a due process that is used to declare a person unfit for possession not the government

Due process has to start with the Legislated arm of the Government in all levels. The Courts can only rule on the existing laws in place and cannot write new laws.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I see lefties frequently screech about how 2A supporters refuse to compromise. Well, that's because there's never BEEN a compromise, rather a one-sided chipping away of 2nd Amendment rights with nothing offered in return.

So here, I'll offer an actual compromise. You lefties want universal background checks? I can get behind that. But in exchange I want universal reciprocity on CCW permits.

Deal?

How about this: we get strong gun control, you kids can have your silly wall.

Why don't you just tell us what gun control law you have hidden up your sleeve that magically stops criminals who don't give a flying fuck about laws to begin with?

As already correctly noted, this fails as a straw man fallacy.

No firearm regulatory measure is a panacea for all gun crime and violence, and no one advocates for them as such.

And that criminals might intend to violate a law renders it neither ineffective nor invalid.

 

[progressive hunter]

Everything you just posted is wrong and inaccurate.

The limits are some buildings, felons and the dangerously mentally ill...AR-15 rifles and standard magazines are protected by the 2nd Amendment, and lower courts ignoring the Heller, McDonald, Caetano, Miller rulings from the Supreme Court are breaking the law, not upholding the law.

It is a national disgrace that the courts do not apply the same strict scrutiny on our right to keep and bear arms like they apply strict scrutiny to all individual rights.

Most gun control laws are unconstitutional.

I suspect that once the old bag dies and Trump gets to appoint a clear Conservative majority Supreme Court there will be a flood of cases to corrupt the oppression that we see.

all gun laws are unconstitutional

The difference between "most" and "all" is very minimal in my opinion.

I suspect that if our Founding Fathers were sitting in a pub and drafting out the Second Amendment over lunch and there was a drunk banishing a gun they would disarm him and then go back to protecting our rights to keep and bear arms.

as like with the 1st A,,, the 2nd protects us from the government not from the guy sitting next to us

and as for the mentally ill, its a due process that is used to declare a person unfit for possession not the government

Due process has to start with the Legislated arm of the Government in all levels. The Courts can only rule on the existing laws in place and cannot write new laws.

unless like in this case its restricted by the constitution

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED is pretty clear

 

[Daryl Hunt]

It is a national disgrace that the courts do not apply the same strict scrutiny on our right to keep and bear arms like they apply strict scrutiny to all individual rights.

Most gun control laws are unconstitutional.

I suspect that once the old bag dies and Trump gets to appoint a clear Conservative majority Supreme Court there will be a flood of cases to corrupt the oppression that we see.

all gun laws are unconstitutional

The difference between "most" and "all" is very minimal in my opinion.

I suspect that if our Founding Fathers were sitting in a pub and drafting out the Second Amendment over lunch and there was a drunk banishing a gun they would disarm him and then go back to protecting our rights to keep and bear arms.

as like with the 1st A,,, the 2nd protects us from the government not from the guy sitting next to us

and as for the mentally ill, its a due process that is used to declare a person unfit for possession not the government

Due process has to start with the Legislated arm of the Government in all levels. The Courts can only rule on the existing laws in place and cannot write new laws.

unless like in this case its restricted by the constitution

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED is pretty clear

Which does not apply to the State and Locals for the most part. The only thing they can't do is not allow you to have a handgun in your home but they can require you to have to register your gun AND have a permit to own it. Most States and Locals don't go that far but the ones that do are perfectly legal. The 2nd Amendment only restricts the Federals, not the States.

 

[Flash]

Everything you just posted is wrong and inaccurate.

The limits are some buildings, felons and the dangerously mentally ill...AR-15 rifles and standard magazines are protected by the 2nd Amendment, and lower courts ignoring the Heller, McDonald, Caetano, Miller rulings from the Supreme Court are breaking the law, not upholding the law.

It is a national disgrace that the courts do not apply the same strict scrutiny on our right to keep and bear arms like they apply strict scrutiny to all individual rights.

Most gun control laws are unconstitutional.

I suspect that once the old bag dies and Trump gets to appoint a clear Conservative majority Supreme Court there will be a flood of cases to corrupt the oppression that we see.

all gun laws are unconstitutional

The difference between "most" and "all" is very minimal in my opinion.

I suspect that if our Founding Fathers were sitting in a pub and drafting out the Second Amendment over lunch and there was a drunk banishing a gun they would disarm him and then go back to protecting our rights to keep and bear arms.

as like with the 1st A,,, the 2nd protects us from the government not from the guy sitting next to us

and as for the mentally ill, its a due process that is used to declare a person unfit for possession not the government

Due process has to start with the Legislated arm of the Government in all levels. The Courts can only rule on the existing laws in place and cannot write new laws.

All we would like to see is that the courts apply the same strict scrutiny to the Constitutional right to keep and bear arms as it does to other individual rights.

The filthy ass Liberal legislatures violates that right all the time and the courts have not done the right thing by overturning those stupid laws and that is the reason the right has been violated by the government so much.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

It is a national disgrace that the courts do not apply the same strict scrutiny on our right to keep and bear arms like they apply strict scrutiny to all individual rights.

Most gun control laws are unconstitutional.

I suspect that once the old bag dies and Trump gets to appoint a clear Conservative majority Supreme Court there will be a flood of cases to corrupt the oppression that we see.

all gun laws are unconstitutional

The difference between "most" and "all" is very minimal in my opinion.

I suspect that if our Founding Fathers were sitting in a pub and drafting out the Second Amendment over lunch and there was a drunk banishing a gun they would disarm him and then go back to protecting our rights to keep and bear arms.

as like with the 1st A,,, the 2nd protects us from the government not from the guy sitting next to us

and as for the mentally ill, its a due process that is used to declare a person unfit for possession not the government

Due process has to start with the Legislated arm of the Government in all levels. The Courts can only rule on the existing laws in place and cannot write new laws.

All we would like to see is that the courts apply the same strict scrutiny to the Constitutional right to keep and bear arms as it does to other individual rights.

The filthy ass Liberal legislatures violates that right all the time and the courts have not done the right thing by overturning those stupid laws and that is the reason the right has been violated by the government so much.

There you go again. When you interject your partisan cupcake BS into the statement, all the rest gets lost and most of us stop reading right there. Try again. This time, try forming a complete thought and communicating it.

 

[progressive hunter]

all gun laws are unconstitutional

The difference between "most" and "all" is very minimal in my opinion.

I suspect that if our Founding Fathers were sitting in a pub and drafting out the Second Amendment over lunch and there was a drunk banishing a gun they would disarm him and then go back to protecting our rights to keep and bear arms.

as like with the 1st A,,, the 2nd protects us from the government not from the guy sitting next to us

and as for the mentally ill, its a due process that is used to declare a person unfit for possession not the government

Due process has to start with the Legislated arm of the Government in all levels. The Courts can only rule on the existing laws in place and cannot write new laws.

unless like in this case its restricted by the constitution

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED is pretty clear

Which does not apply to the State and Locals for the most part. The only thing they can't do is not allow you to have a handgun in your home but they can require you to have to register your gun AND have a permit to own it. Most States and Locals don't go that far but the ones that do are perfectly legal. The 2nd Amendment only restricts the Federals, not the States.

you are so wrong,,,

or unless youre saying that states can ignore the 5th and hang someone without a hearing??? or what about the 1st and jail someone for talking???

and that goes for the rest of the bill of rights

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

This is a lie – as ignorant as it is wrong.

There has been no ‘chipping away’ of Second Amendment rights, ‘one sided’ or otherwise.

Indeed, it was a Republican-appointed, conservative Supreme Court majority that reaffirmed the fact that the Second Amendment right is not unlimited and subject to regulation and restrictions by government.

And the courts have determined that current firearm regulatory measures are perfectly consistent with the Second Amendment, in no manner ‘chipping away’ at that right.

Everything you just posted is wrong and inaccurate.

The limits are some buildings, felons and the dangerously mentally ill...AR-15 rifles and standard magazines are protected by the 2nd Amendment, and lower courts ignoring the Heller, McDonald, Caetano, Miller rulings from the Supreme Court are breaking the law, not upholding the law.

It is a national disgrace that the courts do not apply the same strict scrutiny on our right to keep and bear arms like they apply strict scrutiny to all individual rights.

Most gun control laws are unconstitutional.

I suspect that once the old bag dies and Trump gets to appoint a clear Conservative majority Supreme Court there will be a flood of cases to corrupt the oppression that we see.

all gun laws are unconstitutional

The difference between "most" and "all" is very minimal in my opinion.

I suspect that if our Founding Fathers were sitting in a pub and drafting out the Second Amendment over lunch and there was a drunk banishing a gun they would disarm him and then go back to protecting our rights to keep and bear arms.

as like with the 1st A,,, the 2nd protects us from the government not from the guy sitting next to us

and as for the mentally ill, its a due process that is used to declare a person unfit for possession not the government

lol

This is as ignorant as it is wrong.

The Second Amendment concerns solely the right to possess a firearm pursuant to lawful self-defense, not overthrow a constitutionally elected government through force of arms.

And it's the courts that ensure the right to due process is afforded to the people, courts which are a part of government .

 

[progressive hunter]

oh

Everything you just posted is wrong and inaccurate.

The limits are some buildings, felons and the dangerously mentally ill...AR-15 rifles and standard magazines are protected by the 2nd Amendment, and lower courts ignoring the Heller, McDonald, Caetano, Miller rulings from the Supreme Court are breaking the law, not upholding the law.

It is a national disgrace that the courts do not apply the same strict scrutiny on our right to keep and bear arms like they apply strict scrutiny to all individual rights.

Most gun control laws are unconstitutional.

I suspect that once the old bag dies and Trump gets to appoint a clear Conservative majority Supreme Court there will be a flood of cases to corrupt the oppression that we see.

all gun laws are unconstitutional

The difference between "most" and "all" is very minimal in my opinion.

I suspect that if our Founding Fathers were sitting in a pub and drafting out the Second Amendment over lunch and there was a drunk banishing a gun they would disarm him and then go back to protecting our rights to keep and bear arms.

as like with the 1st A,,, the 2nd protects us from the government not from the guy sitting next to us

and as for the mentally ill, its a due process that is used to declare a person unfit for possession not the government

lol

This is as ignorant as it is wrong.

The Second Amendment concerns solely the right to possess a firearm pursuant to lawful self-defense, not overthrow a constitutionally elected government through force of arms.

And it's the courts that ensure the right to due process is afforded to the people, courts which are a part of government .

oh great its case law clayton to the rescue,,,


you sir are a traitor to your country

 

[Flash]

all gun laws are unconstitutional

The difference between "most" and "all" is very minimal in my opinion.

I suspect that if our Founding Fathers were sitting in a pub and drafting out the Second Amendment over lunch and there was a drunk banishing a gun they would disarm him and then go back to protecting our rights to keep and bear arms.

as like with the 1st A,,, the 2nd protects us from the government not from the guy sitting next to us

and as for the mentally ill, its a due process that is used to declare a person unfit for possession not the government

Due process has to start with the Legislated arm of the Government in all levels. The Courts can only rule on the existing laws in place and cannot write new laws.

All we would like to see is that the courts apply the same strict scrutiny to the Constitutional right to keep and bear arms as it does to other individual rights.

The filthy ass Liberal legislatures violates that right all the time and the courts have not done the right thing by overturning those stupid laws and that is the reason the right has been violated by the government so much.

There you go again. When you interject your partisan cupcake BS into the statement, all the rest gets lost and most of us stop reading right there. Try again. This time, try forming a complete thought and communicating it.

I am sorry that you are a cupcake that is offended by me referring to the asshole Liberals that violates my Constitutional rights as being "filthy ass".

 

[Daryl Hunt]

The difference between "most" and "all" is very minimal in my opinion.

I suspect that if our Founding Fathers were sitting in a pub and drafting out the Second Amendment over lunch and there was a drunk banishing a gun they would disarm him and then go back to protecting our rights to keep and bear arms.

as like with the 1st A,,, the 2nd protects us from the government not from the guy sitting next to us

and as for the mentally ill, its a due process that is used to declare a person unfit for possession not the government

Due process has to start with the Legislated arm of the Government in all levels. The Courts can only rule on the existing laws in place and cannot write new laws.

unless like in this case its restricted by the constitution

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED is pretty clear

Which does not apply to the State and Locals for the most part. The only thing they can't do is not allow you to have a handgun in your home but they can require you to have to register your gun AND have a permit to own it. Most States and Locals don't go that far but the ones that do are perfectly legal. The 2nd Amendment only restricts the Federals, not the States.

you are so wrong,,,

or unless youre saying that states can ignore the 5th and hang someone without a hearing??? or what about the 1st and jail someone for talking???

and that goes for the rest of the bill of rights

Not without throwing out due process they can't. You are really reaching on this one to try and prove you are right. Sorry, didn't work out to well for you, cupcake.

 

[progressive hunter]

as like with the 1st A,,, the 2nd protects us from the government not from the guy sitting next to us

and as for the mentally ill, its a due process that is used to declare a person unfit for possession not the government

Due process has to start with the Legislated arm of the Government in all levels. The Courts can only rule on the existing laws in place and cannot write new laws.

unless like in this case its restricted by the constitution

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED is pretty clear

Which does not apply to the State and Locals for the most part. The only thing they can't do is not allow you to have a handgun in your home but they can require you to have to register your gun AND have a permit to own it. Most States and Locals don't go that far but the ones that do are perfectly legal. The 2nd Amendment only restricts the Federals, not the States.

you are so wrong,,,

or unless youre saying that states can ignore the 5th and hang someone without a hearing??? or what about the 1st and jail someone for talking???

and that goes for the rest of the bill of rights

Not without throwing out due process they can't. You are really reaching on this one to try and prove you are right. Sorry, didn't work out to well for you, cupcake.

that was the point I was making,,,

the bill of rights are part of the supreme law of the land and they over ride all state and local laws

 

[Daryl Hunt]

The difference between "most" and "all" is very minimal in my opinion.

I suspect that if our Founding Fathers were sitting in a pub and drafting out the Second Amendment over lunch and there was a drunk banishing a gun they would disarm him and then go back to protecting our rights to keep and bear arms.

as like with the 1st A,,, the 2nd protects us from the government not from the guy sitting next to us

and as for the mentally ill, its a due process that is used to declare a person unfit for possession not the government

Due process has to start with the Legislated arm of the Government in all levels. The Courts can only rule on the existing laws in place and cannot write new laws.

All we would like to see is that the courts apply the same strict scrutiny to the Constitutional right to keep and bear arms as it does to other individual rights.

The filthy ass Liberal legislatures violates that right all the time and the courts have not done the right thing by overturning those stupid laws and that is the reason the right has been violated by the government so much.

There you go again. When you interject your partisan cupcake BS into the statement, all the rest gets lost and most of us stop reading right there. Try again. This time, try forming a complete thought and communicating it.

I am sorry that you are a cupcake that is offended by me referring to the asshole Liberals that violates my Constitutional rights as being "filthy ass".

Well, Cupcake, you should have called me Snowflake. You really do need to get your insults in order so we can better follow you. Try again. Now, try and form a complete thought and transmit it, cupcake. And then hit send.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Due process has to start with the Legislated arm of the Government in all levels. The Courts can only rule on the existing laws in place and cannot write new laws.

unless like in this case its restricted by the constitution

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED is pretty clear

Which does not apply to the State and Locals for the most part. The only thing they can't do is not allow you to have a handgun in your home but they can require you to have to register your gun AND have a permit to own it. Most States and Locals don't go that far but the ones that do are perfectly legal. The 2nd Amendment only restricts the Federals, not the States.

you are so wrong,,,

or unless youre saying that states can ignore the 5th and hang someone without a hearing??? or what about the 1st and jail someone for talking???

and that goes for the rest of the bill of rights

Not without throwing out due process they can't. You are really reaching on this one to try and prove you are right. Sorry, didn't work out to well for you, cupcake.

that was the point I was making,,,

the bill of rights are part of the supreme law of the land and they over ride all state and local laws

No, the Bill of Rights aren't anything. They are what the first 10 amendments are based on. And inside of those 10 amendments are states right built in along with Federal Limits. I know you want the newly minted Supreme Court of Reds to start running roughshod over the states but that's not their job and if that were to happen then they would not be following the very constitution that they are supposed to support.

 

[progressive hunter]

unless like in this case its restricted by the constitution

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED is pretty clear

Which does not apply to the State and Locals for the most part. The only thing they can't do is not allow you to have a handgun in your home but they can require you to have to register your gun AND have a permit to own it. Most States and Locals don't go that far but the ones that do are perfectly legal. The 2nd Amendment only restricts the Federals, not the States.

you are so wrong,,,

or unless youre saying that states can ignore the 5th and hang someone without a hearing??? or what about the 1st and jail someone for talking???

and that goes for the rest of the bill of rights

Not without throwing out due process they can't. You are really reaching on this one to try and prove you are right. Sorry, didn't work out to well for you, cupcake.

that was the point I was making,,,

the bill of rights are part of the supreme law of the land and they over ride all state and local laws

No, the Bill of Rights aren't anything. They are what the first 10 amendments are based on. And inside of those 10 amendments are states right built in along with Federal Limits. I know you want the newly minted Supreme Court of Reds to start running roughshod over the states but that's not their job and if that were to happen then they would not be following the very constitution that they are supposed to support.

TRAITOR!!!

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Which does not apply to the State and Locals for the most part. The only thing they can't do is not allow you to have a handgun in your home but they can require you to have to register your gun AND have a permit to own it. Most States and Locals don't go that far but the ones that do are perfectly legal. The 2nd Amendment only restricts the Federals, not the States.

you are so wrong,,,

or unless youre saying that states can ignore the 5th and hang someone without a hearing??? or what about the 1st and jail someone for talking???

and that goes for the rest of the bill of rights

Not without throwing out due process they can't. You are really reaching on this one to try and prove you are right. Sorry, didn't work out to well for you, cupcake.

that was the point I was making,,,

the bill of rights are part of the supreme law of the land and they over ride all state and local laws

No, the Bill of Rights aren't anything. They are what the first 10 amendments are based on. And inside of those 10 amendments are states right built in along with Federal Limits. I know you want the newly minted Supreme Court of Reds to start running roughshod over the states but that's not their job and if that were to happen then they would not be following the very constitution that they are supposed to support.

TRAITOR!!!

Why thank you my own personal Terrorist cupcake. I've left you speechless. My job is done here.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Everything you just posted is wrong and inaccurate.

The limits are some buildings, felons and the dangerously mentally ill...AR-15 rifles and standard magazines are protected by the 2nd Amendment, and lower courts ignoring the Heller, McDonald, Caetano, Miller rulings from the Supreme Court are breaking the law, not upholding the law.

It is a national disgrace that the courts do not apply the same strict scrutiny on our right to keep and bear arms like they apply strict scrutiny to all individual rights.

Most gun control laws are unconstitutional.

I suspect that once the old bag dies and Trump gets to appoint a clear Conservative majority Supreme Court there will be a flood of cases to corrupt the oppression that we see.

all gun laws are unconstitutional

The difference between "most" and "all" is very minimal in my opinion.

I suspect that if our Founding Fathers were sitting in a pub and drafting out the Second Amendment over lunch and there was a drunk banishing a gun they would disarm him and then go back to protecting our rights to keep and bear arms.

as like with the 1st A,,, the 2nd protects us from the government not from the guy sitting next to us

and as for the mentally ill, its a due process that is used to declare a person unfit for possession not the government

lol

This is as ignorant as it is wrong.

The Second Amendment concerns solely the right to possess a firearm pursuant to lawful self-defense, not overthrow a constitutionally elected government through force of arms.

And it's the courts that ensure the right to due process is afforded to the people, courts which are a part of government .

Not just the courts but also the Legislative, Governors and Law Enforcement. It's everyone's job to ensure due process.