Infringement

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Which gun control laws do not infringe on the right to keep and bear arms?

Any firearm regulatory measure not invalidated by the courts.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

This thread would be a great place for lefties to justify their anti constitutional stance. C'mon lefties, start listing all the laws that do not infringe on the right to keep and bear arms.

Actually, unlike most on the right, liberals support and defend the Second Amendment and Second Amendment case law,

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

No right is unlimited or unrestricted.

Are you saying that there are no laws that do not infringe on the right to keep and bear arms? You seem kinda slippery about giving a straight answer to the opening post.

Of course there are – and those laws are not being enforced because they were invalidated by the courts.

For example, laws banning handguns violate the Second Amendment, along with measures prohibiting the carrying of concealed weapons.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

No right is unlimited or unrestricted.

Government is strictly limited. That's what the constitution does. It limits government. Strictly. Limited for liberty!

Unfortunately, they function outside its restrictions. This is a consequence of a derelict congress and a complicit electorate.

Wrong.

Acts of government are presumed to be Constitutional until the Supreme Court rules otherwise (see, for example, US v. Morrison (2000)).

However derelict Congress might me, or complicit the electorate, acts of government nonetheless reflect the will of the people, acts which are perfectly lawful provided they comport with Constitutional case law.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

No right is unlimited or unrestricted.

Government is strictly limited. That's what the constitution does. It limits government. Strictly. Limited for liberty!

Unfortunately, they function outside its restrictions. This is a consequence of a derelict congress and a complicit electorate.

Thank you for eloquently making my point NC
~S~

And you are just as wrong as he.

 

[EvMetro]

I doubt I will ever see a gun control law cited on this thread that does not infringe on the right to keep and bear arms.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Acts of government are presumed to be Constitutional until the Supreme Court rules otherwise

Gonna have to show us judicial review in Article III, Clayton.

The Constitution makes no mention of the right of the Supreme Court to declare federal and state laws unconstitutional. No place whatsever.

This is the job of the Congress. Which, unfortunately, is derelict in its responsibilities. Most of em aren't even of the intellectual capacity to even participate in that kind of debate, to be perfectly honest.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Which gun control laws do not infringe on the right to keep and bear arms?

They all 'infringe' , and have done so for almost a century

• Firearm case law in the United States
• Gun law in the United States
• Gun politics in the United States
• Uniform Firearms Act

~S~

And again: firearm regulatory measures not invalidated by the courts do not infringe on the Second Amendment.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Which gun control laws do not infringe on the right to keep and bear arms?

Any of them that don't completely eliminate the right for anyone, anywhere to own a gun.

Name one gun control law that does not infringe on the right to keep and bear arms.

Infringe: To act so as to limit or undermine

There are many laws that don’t infringe on the right to keep and bear arms, such as background checks, magazine capacity restrictions, and waiting periods.

That a law might be bad, ridiculous, or otherwise ineffective doesn’t necessarily mean it infringes on the Second Amendment right, and it doesn’t make that law un-Constitutional.

 

[sparky]

Acts of government are presumed to be Constitutional until the Supreme Court rules otherwise (see, for example, US v. Morrison (2000)).

I realize it's a living doc Clay , with many scotus challenges

Yet when they let something like the PA slide

I don't have to consider them a 'constitutional benchmark' anymore

However derelict Congress might me, or complicit the electorate, acts of government nonetheless reflect the will of the people, acts which are perfectly lawful provided they comport with Constitutional case law.

They're supposed to, but no longer do Clay
Corruption is Legal in America

And you are just as wrong as he.

I'd like to be.....honestly....

Gonna have to show us judicial review in Article III, Clayton.

Way over my head....

~S~

 

[Natural Citizen]

Way over my head....

~S~

The Absurdity of ‘Judicial Review’

 

[EvMetro]

Which gun control laws do not infringe on the right to keep and bear arms?

They all 'infringe' , and have done so for almost a century

• Firearm case law in the United States
• Gun law in the United States
• Gun politics in the United States
• Uniform Firearms Act

~S~

And again: firearm regulatory measures not invalidated by the courts do not infringe on the Second Amendment.

I'd love to see a gun control law cited here that does not infringe on the right to keep and bear arms. I doubt it will ever happen.

 

[Natural Citizen]

And again: firearm regulatory measures not invalidated by the courts do not infringe on the Second Amendment.

How can the Supreme Court use judicial review to gain the power of judicial review?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

No right is unlimited or unrestricted.

prove it,,,

Already did.

There are laws on slander and libel.

There are laws on instigating riots.

You can't own a nuke.

You can't sacrifice virgins.

Correct.

Hate speech that advocates for imminent lawlessness and violence is not entitled to First Amendment protections.

Prison cell searches and seizures do not violate the 4th Amendment rights of inmates.

Private property designated as contraband is not entitled to 5th Amendment Takings Clause protections.

The Second Amendment is no different.

 

[sparky]

And again: firearm regulatory measures not invalidated by the courts do not infringe on the Second Amendment.

How can the Supreme Court use judicial review to gain the power of judicial review?

who watches the watchers NC...?
~S~

 

[sparky]

You can't sacrifice virgins.

well.....erruhmmm....can ya find one anymore....?

~S~

 

[Natural Citizen]

who watches the watchers NC...?
~S~

Supposed to be the electorate watching them. But they're watching Watters' World. Cheering about bipartisan legislation putting us in cages with neither charge nor trial and whatnot.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

This thread would be a great place for lefties to justify their anti constitutional stance. C'mon lefties, start listing all the laws that do not infringe on the right to keep and bear arms.

Please explain which rights are unlimited. I believe all have restrictions.

Why is the 2nd a special case?

What is the definition of the "right" you are referencing.

You can believe all rights have restrictions (and I agree....free speech does not cover pornography), but you have to prove how that is the case.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Should a right have limitations?

Why don't you start a thread about this? In the meantime, you are evading the opening post like a cat evades being shoved into a toilet. You can't name a single law that does not infringe, and you can't admit that you cant.

So, do you think a right is unlimited?

Clearly, the law preventing you from having nukes infringes on your "right" to "keep and bear arms". Happy now?

Good.

Glad that right is infringed on.

Has anyone tested that hypothosis in court ?

 

[Sun Devil 92]

This thread would be a great place for lefties to justify their anti constitutional stance. C'mon lefties, start listing all the laws that do not infringe on the right to keep and bear arms.

Please explain which rights are unlimited. I believe all have restrictions.

Why is the 2nd a special case?

This thread is not about which rights are unlimited, it simply asks which gun control laws do not limit the right to keep and bear arms. Candle you list some of them?

Can't "candle" anything at the moment.

However, you can't examine rights in a vacuum much as you would like to. No rights are unlimited. You aren't allowed to own a nuke. You can't use your right to free speech to provoke a riot or slander or libel. Your right of assembly doesn't allow you to assemble a riot or take down the government. Your religious freedom does not allow you to keep slaves or conduct human sacrifices.

You should start a thread about how no rights are unlimited, if that is what you want to talk about. This thread is meant for discussing all the gun control laws that don't infringe on the right to keep and bear arms. Can you even name a single one?

The constitution sets the rules for the federal government.

It does not (or did not) apply to state legislators.

Most state constitutions have a 2nd amendment in them proving that they understood that.

Until we got to selective incorporation. Which a mess and a disaster.

Without incorporation, states could, in theory, regulate arms.