But they are not likely to succeed. The court said some restrictions are permissible, such as a ban on carrying concealed guns and barring sales to felons. But new regulations will have to be defensible as means to protect vital governmental interests without unduly burdening gun rights. Registration and safety training are plausible requirements. But anything that seems designed more to deter people from getting guns than at assuring their safe use will be invalidated.
Not that this fact will stop the gun control zealots in Washington from doing their worst. They may not be able to get their way, but they can postpone the day when the Second Amendment actually means what it says in their jurisdiction.
What FishyJay had to say about it is this.
Invalidated? One can hope. But as we recently discussed, to deter people from getting guns is an important goal of "gun control." No wonder Heller is such a problem.I agree with the idea that it's unlikely anything will be invalidated, but not with the motive behind these things.Of course, some gun rights activists will disagree with "registration and safety training are plausible requirements." But the underlying objection to registration is all the instances where registered guns have been confiscated and where registration and safety training are purposely made complex to deter compliance for the sake of deterring gun ownership. If further clarifications of Heller do indeed prohibit confiscation and "anything that seems designed more to deter people from getting guns than at assuring their safe use," then the main objection by many gunowners to registration and safety training will have been removed.
What do you think? Please leave a comment.
"But as we recently discussed, to deter people from getting guns is an important goal of "gun control."
ReplyDeleteWhat nonsense.
The goal of gun control is to see that folks who shouldn't have guns (criminals, mentally ill, etc) shouldn't get guns.
OTOH, gunloons are doing everything they can to ensure criminals and terrorists obtain weapons.
--JadeGold
"But as we recently discussed, to deter people from getting guns is an important goal of "gun control."
ReplyDeleteJadeGold: "What nonsense."
Oops! mikeb recently agreed with me on that, as I was referring to by "as we recently discussed."
JadeGold: "The goal of gun control is to see that folks who shouldn't have guns (criminals, mentally ill, etc) shouldn't get guns."
Belied by the fact that gun control advocates constantly promote gun control using incidents in which the shooters were NOT "criminals, mentally ill, etc," and by gun control advocates often pointing out and bemoaning how often shooters were "law-abiding" UNTIL their crime.
FishyJay said, "Belied by the fact that gun control advocates constantly promote gun control using incidents in which the shooters were NOT "criminals, mentally ill, etc," and by gun control advocates often pointing out and bemoaning how often shooters were "law-abiding" UNTIL their crime."
ReplyDeleteThat's exactly where my immensely popular 10% theory comes in.
The goal of gun control is to see that folks who shouldn't have guns (criminals, mentally ill, etc) shouldn't get guns.
ReplyDeleteThen why, when those folks are already barred from having guns, do you anti-gunners scream for even more gun control.
Your goal is to keep Americans from owning guns. Period. It always has been, and your words and actions show your true colors.