🇳🇱
While I am often not very happy witht he GOP leaning SCOTUS on this one I really am glad to have a right-leaning supreme court.
Lets hope they do the right thing and knock down these and similar state-laws as unconstitutional and in violation of the #2A
@freemo Make a case for this being unconstitutional.
@jaysonmassey I'd say the wording of the second amendment makes it very clear. It is pretty clear about the right to bear arms "shall not be infringed".. its also very clear (and stated in countless direct quotes from the authors) that the "well regulated militia" is a exemplary clause and not a qualifying clause.
So, as far as i can tell, the current wording and history is so clear there isnt much need to make a case, or at least, there shouldnt be much need.
@freemo @jaysonmassey "the right to BEAR arms". The law doesn't seem to stop that. Though no civilised country should have that as part of its constitution anyway
The drfinition of infringe is "To act so as to limit".
If you are placing limits on my right to bear arms, by a law that exludes guns, then by definition you are infringing. So outside of limitations placed elsewhere in the constitution itself tpany state law to limit what guns one can bear is unconstitutional
Well then, why stop at guns? Why can't we have nuclear weapons? Mustard gas? Plastic explosives? Those are weapons.
The arguments break down. I would do some more reading on it. I put a couple of articles there. Just read them, I don't expect you to agree with them.
https://thehill.com/opinion/criminal-justice/3837733-forgotten-words-a-well-regulated-militia/
