This is great news, but it's a mistake to assume that the left is principled enough to allow that mistake to have any effect on their gun grabbing attempts.
Yeah, United States v. Miller (1939) stated that the Second Amendment only applied to weapons currently or formerly in use by a military power. The leftists still freak out about muh Mfowuhs and muh weaponz uf wahhhr. Hell, the Founders stated during the ratification of the Constitution that the Second Amendment covered "... swords and every terrible implement of the soldier..." and that the only people who could be legally disarmed were government employees. Still doesn't stop lefties from braying about guns.
The power of the sword, say the minority..., is in the hands of Congress. My friends and countrymen, it is not so, for the powers of the sword are in the hands of the yeomanry of America from sixteen to sixty. The militia of these free commonwealths, entitled and accustomed to their arms, when compared with any possible army, must be tremendous and irresistible. Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress has no power to disarm the militia. Their swords and every terrible implement of the soldier are the birthright of Americans. - Tench Cox
I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few public officials. -George Mason
Doesn't SCOTUS ever think about all the gang shootings and crimes of passion that are committed with modified AR-15's? Man walks in on his wife cheating on him, or a junkie catches his dealer trying to scam him, and before you know it, out comes the AR-15!
There's a reason they target AR-15s and not concealable handguns. They're fine with their pet dindus shooting each other up in gang warfare, so they'll only go after handguns once they've stolen all the rifles.
ARs would be the primary defense weapon against them. that's why even though ALL rifles are only a tiny fraction of homicides, the main target of their propaganda is ARs.
by targeting the source of "the problem" dead LAST, they get to constantly battle and fight "the problem", raising money, drumming up political support. it's just another forever war.
they would never do anything that actually stops their golems from shooting shit up. quite the opposite, they will bend over backwards to guarantee that golems can keep fighting.
No governmental body can ban any firearm or weapon without breaking the entire contract of the Bill of Rights and Constitution. Any infringement gives the people the right to remove the government, with force if necessary.
the only issue before the court was whether the ATF has authority to redefine terms under the NFA, not whether it's constitutional for congress to pass it. SCOTUS cannot rule on constitutionality of a law passed by congress, because no congressional law was passed. they cannot hypothesize what the language of that law MIGHT be. SCOTUS does not have authority to do so.
any statements beyond the immediate issue of the case is called dicta. it holds no legal authority because it is not at issue in the case. the judiciary lacks authority to rule on any issue not immediately before them. YOU are making the inference that because alito said legislative authority lies with congress, not an executive agency, that congress passing the same regulation as law would be constitutional. he did not say that. you are assigning the implication. this is a textbook law school dicta trap.
in law school they even warn you to not rely on dicta because it holds no legal authority, and judges regularly go against the implications of their own dicta. there have been multiple instances where SCOTUS ruled that a regulation from an executive body was beyond their authority, and then when legislative bodies passed laws on the issue, it was then found unconstitutional anyways.
Good, I want Americans to be as armed as they want to be. I want to return to the era where guns were simply tools than the 'big bad bogeyman' the liberals spent DECADES of propaganda to paint them as.
Now SCOTUS, bring in broad president immunity to REALLY stomp on the left's nuts with a steel capped boot!
It's unfortunately going to take an extremely hard societal reset which I do believe is on the way as bad as things are now for normies to adjust their attitudes towards self-defence nevermind guns. Namely, it's going to be survival of the fittest with most of the virtue signallers killing themselves through their virtue signal. It's happening already as we've seen with the peace and love types thinking they can travel the world with zero consequences and will only escalate as they get more insistent.
Haha. Yeah when has the left ever cared about laws, precedent, or the constitution. They will still ban them and the right will just accept it like they always do.
As HallucinatoryBeing pointed out above he thought it would be an easy win with normies and the media. He may have even thought it would save lives. Trump is essentially a classic New York democrat. He doesn't know anything about firearms or 2A and doesn't particularly care for them either way. He only backs the right to bear arms because he's a populist and that's what his constituents demand. Thankfully that means he put in judges who do understand 2A.
Donald Trump Jr. is also a huge gun/hunting/fishing guy. I'm sure he has his dad's ear on some of this stuff. I haven't heard him talk about the bump stock ban though.
The second amendment isn't confusing. Only someone who is trying to be deceptive, a bad actor, can find ways to make the 2A unclear. And to that end, all laws can be made to say something else. This is the power of sophistry
This is great news, but it's a mistake to assume that the left is principled enough to allow that mistake to have any effect on their gun grabbing attempts.
Yeah, United States v. Miller (1939) stated that the Second Amendment only applied to weapons currently or formerly in use by a military power. The leftists still freak out about muh Mfowuhs and muh weaponz uf wahhhr. Hell, the Founders stated during the ratification of the Constitution that the Second Amendment covered "... swords and every terrible implement of the soldier..." and that the only people who could be legally disarmed were government employees. Still doesn't stop lefties from braying about guns.
Good. Take from them everything. The admin state with agencies that no one voted for need to be kneecapped as often and as hard as possible.
This must be why Sotomayor wept.
Doesn't SCOTUS ever think about all the gang shootings and crimes of passion that are committed with modified AR-15's? Man walks in on his wife cheating on him, or a junkie catches his dealer trying to scam him, and before you know it, out comes the AR-15!
There's a reason they target AR-15s and not concealable handguns. They're fine with their pet dindus shooting each other up in gang warfare, so they'll only go after handguns once they've stolen all the rifles.
ARs would be the primary defense weapon against them. that's why even though ALL rifles are only a tiny fraction of homicides, the main target of their propaganda is ARs.
by targeting the source of "the problem" dead LAST, they get to constantly battle and fight "the problem", raising money, drumming up political support. it's just another forever war.
they would never do anything that actually stops their golems from shooting shit up. quite the opposite, they will bend over backwards to guarantee that golems can keep fighting.
You can't wage a war, or fight off tyrants and their armies with handguns. You need rifles for that, which is why they want to ban rifles.
I'm fine with this. Was one of the few things I completely disagreed with President Trump on.
The issue is the dog-killing ATF did it on their own. This should be a law thru congress.
Maybe, but I definitely remember it was something he supported.
Because the Las Vegas fed-op just happened and he wanted to be seen Doing Something™.
No governmental body can ban any firearm or weapon without breaking the entire contract of the Bill of Rights and Constitution. Any infringement gives the people the right to remove the government, with force if necessary.
SCOTUS did not rule on whether it'd be constitutional for Congress to do this. all they ruled was that the ATF cannot.
Alito outright says they can: https://x.com/andrewmgrossman/status/1801621669103976773
you're misreading what he says.
congress has the authority to legislate, not the ATF. doesn't make congress doing it constitutional.
go to law school.
If he, a SUPREME COURT FUCKING JUDGE, felt it was completely unconstitutional you think he wouldn't give them a green light to do just that.
"Congress can amend the law" "Congress can act" English motherfucker can you read it?
the only issue before the court was whether the ATF has authority to redefine terms under the NFA, not whether it's constitutional for congress to pass it. SCOTUS cannot rule on constitutionality of a law passed by congress, because no congressional law was passed. they cannot hypothesize what the language of that law MIGHT be. SCOTUS does not have authority to do so.
any statements beyond the immediate issue of the case is called dicta. it holds no legal authority because it is not at issue in the case. the judiciary lacks authority to rule on any issue not immediately before them. YOU are making the inference that because alito said legislative authority lies with congress, not an executive agency, that congress passing the same regulation as law would be constitutional. he did not say that. you are assigning the implication. this is a textbook law school dicta trap.
in law school they even warn you to not rely on dicta because it holds no legal authority, and judges regularly go against the implications of their own dicta. there have been multiple instances where SCOTUS ruled that a regulation from an executive body was beyond their authority, and then when legislative bodies passed laws on the issue, it was then found unconstitutional anyways.
no, you're misreading the meaning of what he said. YOU are applying meaning to something that he said, but the meaning YOU are taking, he did not say.
go to law school.
Good, I want Americans to be as armed as they want to be. I want to return to the era where guns were simply tools than the 'big bad bogeyman' the liberals spent DECADES of propaganda to paint them as.
Now SCOTUS, bring in broad president immunity to REALLY stomp on the left's nuts with a steel capped boot!
I want founding stock type Americans to be well armed and I want leftists, black people, and first & second generation immigrants to not be.
It's unfortunately going to take an extremely hard societal reset which I do believe is on the way as bad as things are now for normies to adjust their attitudes towards self-defence nevermind guns. Namely, it's going to be survival of the fittest with most of the virtue signallers killing themselves through their virtue signal. It's happening already as we've seen with the peace and love types thinking they can travel the world with zero consequences and will only escalate as they get more insistent.
Trump's lucky he got justices keeping things uncomfortable for leftists while he's not in power.
just strike down the nfa already
Haha. Yeah when has the left ever cared about laws, precedent, or the constitution. They will still ban them and the right will just accept it like they always do.
What was that strategy? Attack them from the left?
As HallucinatoryBeing pointed out above he thought it would be an easy win with normies and the media. He may have even thought it would save lives. Trump is essentially a classic New York democrat. He doesn't know anything about firearms or 2A and doesn't particularly care for them either way. He only backs the right to bear arms because he's a populist and that's what his constituents demand. Thankfully that means he put in judges who do understand 2A.
Donald Trump Jr. is also a huge gun/hunting/fishing guy. I'm sure he has his dad's ear on some of this stuff. I haven't heard him talk about the bump stock ban though.
The second amendment isn't confusing. Only someone who is trying to be deceptive, a bad actor, can find ways to make the 2A unclear. And to that end, all laws can be made to say something else. This is the power of sophistry
ELEVENTH DIMENSIONAL CHESS
3D chess! Trump bates the retards into defying him. He administers a bump stock ban, the liberals overturn it, and here we are.