bookmark
BS, that's been the Left's strategy by increasing qualifying "crimes" that allow for elimination of your 2nd amendment rights.
I'm not sure what the incorporation doctrine has to do with this case, though. This 3rd Circuit case is a challenge to federal law, 18 USC s. 922(g)(1), not a state law. So the 2nd Amendment applies directly, not through incorporation in the 14th Amendment.
That is dead-on-target for a previous Barrett ruling.
I was just thinking, if the govt. could get away with requiring auto weapons to be licensed and require a costly stamp, what’s to prevent them from doing the same thing with semi autos?
I worry about gang-bangers, Martha Stewart, not so much.
For the first 200 years of our Republic, Rights were restored after the sentence was served.
This gives convicted felons one less reason to straighten up and fly right.
If a violent felon is too dangerous to be let loose, then don’t let them loose. If you have to let them loose, then let the rest of us... including non-violent felons, exercise our Right to defend ourselves.
If you’re a felon and you’re allowed to vote then you should be allowed to carry arms.
The problem with the left is they are starting to consider spoken words as violence.
If the individual rights are all equally applied, a felon didn’t lose the first ammendant right, why lose the second ammendment once all time and fines are served?
If we don’t trust convicted felons with guns, why do we trust them with knives, baseball bats, cars, containers of gasoline ...
Additional offenses that should qualify for a lifetime ban on firearms possession:
Overdue library books.
Failure to wear a mask on a deserted island.
Removing the tag on a mattress.
Joining the NRA.
Owning a magazine with 4 or more rounds capacity.
This court needs to address what the words “shall not be infringed” mean.
This would address prior felons, so-called class 3 restrictions and, really, most gun laws.