This is just fabricated hot garbage. In truth, there were cases on weapons carrying, mostly because of the rise of prohibitions on concealed carry in frontier states. Everything was filed and resolved at the state level, and there wasn’t a wave of 2A defenses trying to beat the state restrictions - meaning, there was no recourse in the US Constitution to challenge the laws, and everyone knew it.
And the only way anyone could try to claim a 2A defense after the Civil War was through the 14A.
So, yes, it was plenty ripe - the moment there has been any restriction on ownership or carrying, which started hundreds of years ago, made a case ripe.
Sure, they had racist gun bans, I didn’t say otherwise. What I said was there were other restrictions that weren’t based on being punitive to blacks that were challenged, but the 2A wasn’t available to them.
Which, being true, contradicts your made-up bullshit that the reason no one challenged gun restrictions via the 2A was because they were minorities afraid to seek redress of their rights.
Trump-Hitler comparison is retarded. There are some lessons to be learned from Hitler’s dismantling of the Weimar republic and and the meek acquiescence of the German conservatives and the army, but a case could be made for comparing Trump to this guy…who wanted to make AMERICA GREAT
And FTR, I am good to move on from 2A discussion and stop derailing the thread. But holy smokes, the inverse ratio between 2A enthusiasm and actual knowledge of the 2A is staggering. Have an opinion, but have an informed opinion, and on a complicated topic like the 2A, enough with the empty swagger that you’ve smugly got it all figured out and that everyone who disagrees is intentionally ignoring the obvious.
But seriously, this debate crops up every so often, and we are always treated to the initial “duh, it’s so simple, why is there even a debate” noise - sure thing, lots of highly intelligent legal minds - Left, Right, and Center - have written thousands of pages analyzing the meaning of the 2A and even the recent Supreme Court cases didn’t truly settle the question (anyone know what Scalia meant when he said reasonable restrictions?)…
…who knew these legal minds and Supreme Court Justices have wasted so much time on an issue as clear and easy to understand a recipe for toast?
Here’s an attempt to bring it back. What are the odds we can get some changes to the NFA under a president Trump? Suppressors cheap and plentiful in all 50 states, that would be nice.
Has Trump really said that much…either during his run for the Presidency or now…about working to repeal a lot of gun regulation…or has it just been overshadowed by so many other things?
I’m impressed it’s that high. A testament to the ability of his base to suspend disbelief. I’ll bet they enjoy the hell out of those Fast and Furious movies.
Soooo… Wikileaks’ biggest fan suddenly changed his tune. Apparently, “leaks are the worst thing ever”. Talk about hypocrisy…
“From intelligence, papers are being leaked, things are being leaked; it’s criminal action. It’s a criminal act, and it’s been going on for a long time before me, but now it’s really going on,” Trump said Wednesday during a joint news conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
“People are trying to cover up for a terrible loss that the Democrats had under Hillary Clinton,” he added.
To be fair, this does not go only for Trump fans and constitutional law. No doubt thousands of scorching-hot Facebook comment debates have persisted wherein people that literally cannot spell the words needed for intelligent discussion on a subject carry on, guns blazing. To name one near to my heart, this phenomenon can be observed in vaccine-safety discussions all the time; people that can’t name an element of the periodic table are suddenly experts in precisely how vaccines cause autism. It’s honestly terrifying to see that much stupidity concentrated in one place.
