Replies

"At some point, the courts will rule on these blatantly unconstitutional laws! Hopefully, they will be ruled unconstitutional."

They already have:

FEDERAL LEGISLATION

I am so d@mn tired of these @$$holes who seem to think that our Constitution doesn't prevent the Feds from doing exactly what they want to do!

Even the SCOTUS has ruled these gun grabbing laws unconstitutional.
(They, the gun grabbers just ignore the rulings ... and the constitution because 'we' allow them to.)

In United States v. Cruikshank (1876), the Supreme Court ruled that, "The right to bear arms is not granted by the Constitution; neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence.

The Second Amendments means no more than that it shall not be infringed by Congress, and has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the National Government.

Then there is this:

Heller, Caetano v Massachusetts
It is settled that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms that applies against both the Federal Government and the States.

And this:

McDonald v. City of Chicago
A case in which on June 28, 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled (5–4) that the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, applies to state and local governments as well as to the federal government.

And:

District of Columbia v. Heller

Some have made the argument, bordering on the frivolous, that only those arms in existence in the 18th century are protected by the Second Amendment.

We do not interpret constitutional rights that way.

Just as the First Amendment protects modern forms of communications, and the Fourth Amendment applies to modern forms of search, the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding.
(If Heller tells us anything, it is that firearms cannot be categorically prohibited just because they are dangerous.)

In Marbury v. Madison the Supreme Court announced for the first time the principle that a court may declare an act of Congress void if it is inconsistent with the Constitution.

The one thing that I don't agree with on these Constitutional Rights rulings is that, Our Rights Do not come from the Constitution!

THE 2ND AND THE CONSTITUTION