As the death count is still rising from the three horrendous mass shootings in the past week, and innocent victims continue to suffer in hospital beds, you have to ask yourself why gun owners are so stubborn about assault-style weapons. You would think that responsible, law-abiding gun owners who own common-sense weapons would be the first ones to desire a ban on assault-style weapons.
Assault weapons are already tightly regulated, have never been used to perpetrate any mass murder, and are not a problem in this country.
Undoubtedly, we'll see the usual quibbling about definitions of assault weapons, types of triggers, gun add-ons, etc.
No quibbling. An assault weapon is capable of full auto fire.
I know that New York passed the SAFE Legislation, which outlawed assault-style weapons,
That is incorrect. It outlawed ordinary semi-auto weapons.
and it was challenged to the SCOTUS, and was dismissed.
The fact that they didn't take the case does not lessen the violation of people's civil liberties.
I suggest that all additional gun control be blocked, even if it is otherwise acceptable and would actually save lives, until all of these unconstitutional laws are abolished and progressives pay compensation to all of the gun owners whose civil liberties they have violated so grievously.
So tell me more about this "common gun" version of the 2nd Amendment that you have created.
I assume that he is referring to the fact that the government is not allowed to restrict a gun unless they can demonstrate a compelling government interest.
The New York SAFE law protects constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens, while using common-sense gun control, registrations, waiting periods, etc.
That is incorrect. It grievously violates people's civil liberties.
Why do people who want to violate civil liberties always use terms like "reasonable" and "common sense"?
Never.
I missed that part in the 2nd amendment about "Waiting Periods".:roll:
Fundamental rights can only be restricted if there is a compelling government interest. I've yet to see any justification given for a waiting period longer than three days (and that only if the background check doesn't clear immediately).
That power is available to any state that wants to institute "waiting periods".
Not if the waiting period has no justification.
Any state can ban assault weapons.
Perhaps, but banning ordinary semi-autos is unconstitutional.
Yeah, how's that working out....
Supreme Court rules on states' assault weapons ban - CBS News
WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court has rejected challenges to assault weapons bans in Connecticut and New York, in the aftermath of the shooting attack on a gay nightclub in Orlando, Florida, that left 50 people dead.
The justices on Monday left in place a lower court ruling that upheld laws that were passed in response to another mass shooting involving a semi-automatic weapon, the elementary school attack in Newtown, Connecticut.
Seven states currently ban assault-style weapons, and many more have legislation on the books. America is not buying the crap anymore.
Those laws ban ordinary weapons, not assault weapons.
As I suggested above, we should oppose all gun control measures, even if they are otherwise acceptable and would actually save lives, until these unconstitutional monstrosities are abolished and progressives pay compensation to all of the gun owners whose civil liberties they have violated so grievously.
Most of these rejections were after Heller. Assault-like weapons will soon be history in this country, as sanity starts to restore itself.
That is unlikely. They are not a problem, and many parts of the country are unlikely to outlaw them.
eace
