Go Back   Maryland Shooters > Gun Rights and Legislation > National 2A Issues
Don't Have An Account? Register Here

Join MD Shooters

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old August 22nd, 2019, 11:49 AM #1
kshaw kshaw is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Gaithersburg, MD
Posts: 59
kshaw kshaw is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Gaithersburg, MD
Posts: 59
Why does an Assault Weapons ban not Require a Contitutional Amendment?

I was reading an old legal opinion (1995) on the Fourteenth Amendment by the DOJ. The opinion was made in response to an attempt by Congress to stop birthright citizenship for aliens through a statute. The legal opinion opined that this proposed statute was unconstitutional and that the change could only be made by an amendment to the Constitution. Using the same logic for the Second Amendment, how can Congress create a ban on "Assault Weapons" or similar restrictions without an amendment to the Constitution?
kshaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 22nd, 2019, 11:58 AM #2
KJackson's Avatar
KJackson KJackson is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Carroll County
Posts: 2,955
KJackson KJackson is online now
Senior Member
KJackson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Carroll County
Posts: 2,955
IANAL, but they will probably say that they are not getting rid of the 2A entirely. They will argue that since specifics of which arms are not spelled out in the 2A, as long as even one type of firearm is allowed for public ownership/use, the 2A is being followed.
__________________
“May God save the country, for it is obvious the people will not.” – Millard Fillmore
KJackson is online now   Reply With Quote
Old August 22nd, 2019, 12:01 PM #3
sundazes's Avatar
sundazes sundazes is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Arkham
Posts: 8,386
sundazes sundazes is offline
Senior Member
sundazes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Arkham
Posts: 8,386
How did Clinton do it?
sundazes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 22nd, 2019, 12:04 PM #4
ironpony's Avatar
ironpony ironpony is offline
@therange
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Crofton/Davidsonville
Posts: 5,155
ironpony ironpony is offline
@therange
ironpony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Crofton/Davidsonville
Posts: 5,155
It does seem that a law may be passed and any given item may be destroyed/removed from existence long before the SCOTUS gets a chance to prove said law's Constitutionality. By that time the "animal" is extinct.
Legal types please tell me I am wrong.


Seems strange to remove firearms from Americans as the Chinese are increasing their military ... and without boundaries, they are making their own islands for this.
__________________
ICBW
ironpony is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 22nd, 2019, 12:09 PM #5
jc1240's Avatar
jc1240 jc1240 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Carroll County
Posts: 7,231
jc1240 jc1240 is offline
Senior Member
jc1240's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Carroll County
Posts: 7,231
Quote:
Originally Posted by KJackson View Post
IANAL, but they will probably say that they are not getting rid of the 2A entirely. They will argue that since specifics of which arms are not spelled out in the 2A, as long as even one type of firearm is allowed for public ownership/use, the 2A is being followed.
Arguing with them, not you...

That's like saying you can use sign language, but all other forms are off-limits with regard to 1A.
__________________
John
jc1240 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 22nd, 2019, 12:11 PM #6
danb's Avatar
danb danb is online now
i pi
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Howard County
Posts: 18,886
danb danb is online now
i pi
danb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Howard County
Posts: 18,886
The intellectually honest answer is that it does.

The left these days is not intellectually honest. As are some of their judicial appointments, who would rather pretend the 2A does not exist. The left hates the police, but want to make sure that only the police have guns. smh
danb is online now   Reply With Quote
Old August 22nd, 2019, 12:23 PM #7
TheOriginalMexicanBob's Avatar
TheOriginalMexicanBob TheOriginalMexicanBob is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Frederick
Posts: 6,348
TheOriginalMexicanBob TheOriginalMexicanBob is online now
Senior Member
TheOriginalMexicanBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Frederick
Posts: 6,348
Any proposal passed and enacted into law is considered legal until challenged in court. It ca't be challenged before enacted as there is no one yet suffering harm thus there is no standing to sue at that point. Once a court decides whether it's Constitutional it then becomes appealable and every step of that process takes time. Before it ultimately is decided for good (such as by SCOTUS if it gets that high)...a lot of damage can be done to our rights and to the industry itself.

This is why such obviously anti-freedom proposals should and need to be fought to keep them from becoming law. Even if found to be unconstitutional by the court system later much damage is done...and the entire law may not be ruled to be unconstitutional...some restrictions can be left in place.
__________________
Back-to-Back World War Champion.
TheOriginalMexicanBob is online now   Reply With Quote
Old August 22nd, 2019, 12:51 PM #8
Beancounter Beancounter is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 94
Beancounter Beancounter is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by sundazes View Post
How did Clinton do it?

He didn't. The law prohibited manufacturers from selling certain firearms with certain features (folding / collapsing stock), flash hider, bayonet lug, etc. The law prohibited manufacturers from selling new 30 round magazines to anyone except LE. The law restricted manufacturers, not people. Congress has the authority to regulate interstate commerce.

I bought my first AR during this "ban". I bought surplus standard military issue magazines (30 rds) and a Colt AR 15 which was a heavy barrel, no flash hider, no collapsing stock). It shoots the same bullet as those with these "evil death enhancing features". Manufacturers made new standard issue (30 rds) magazines marked LE ONLY and traded them to the police for the old (not new manufacture) magazines which were legal to sell.

We have a government that does not follow its own laws, headed by people who will not enforce laws they are sworn to enforce.

Want to know how that happens? WE THE PEOPLE let it happen. We are letting it happen again. No people can claim they have a right to freedom when they pass laws to limit the freedom of others. This applies to both sides, equally and more than to firearms.

Supposedly Ben said "You have a republic, IF YOU CAN KEEP IT
Beancounter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 22nd, 2019, 01:23 PM #9
delaware_export delaware_export is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 431
delaware_export delaware_export is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 431
by the supreme courts logic in heller, any firearm "in common use" and useful to a militia is protected. and while no real count exists, the estimates i've heard are the there are over 12m ar pattern rifles. though that number is probably much higher. add ak pattern rifles, and various other mag fed rifles of other makes, on it's face, the law would seem to be in jeopardy.

and as for all semi-auto. pistols, rifles, and shotguns, again, common use.

and lets face it, if you are a2a, bolt actions and even muzzle loaders are military grade firearms, if you look at history, probably killed more people than "assault weapons". mausers, moisins, springfields, enfields, and all the similar pattern guns they spawned and descended from...

yeah, a preaching to the choir rant. sorry.

so, if the law passed, how long would it take for that case to get to court? would an activist judge ignore this part of heller? heller yes. how many years would it sit in lower courts? would scotus hear it?
delaware_export is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 22nd, 2019, 01:32 PM #10
ChannelCat's Avatar
ChannelCat ChannelCat is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Bowie, the People's Republik of Maryland SSR
Posts: 2,350
ChannelCat ChannelCat is offline
Senior Member
ChannelCat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Bowie, the People's Republik of Maryland SSR
Posts: 2,350
Quote:
Originally Posted by kshaw View Post
Using the same logic for the Second Amendment, how can Congress create a ban on "Assault Weapons" or similar restrictions without an amendment to the Constitution?
It's easy. The libtards live and die by the old and discredited "living breathing constitution" bull$hit. Read: the constitution means whatever the fvck that we say it means to fit "evolving standards". This is why appointing constitutionalists to the courts is so important...
__________________
"Since the general civilization of mankind, I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of freedoms of the people by gradual and silent encroachment of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations."
- James Madison 1788

The framers knew that the way militias were destroyed by tyrants in the past was not by passing a law against militias, but by taking away the people's weapons.
- Antonin Scalia 2008
ChannelCat is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

  Home Page > Forum List > Gun Rights and Legislation > National 2A Issues


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:36 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
© 2019, Congregate Media, LP Privacy Policy Terms of Service