Posted on 08/28/2019 7:01:55 PM PDT by richardb72
A leading gun rights advocate has warned upcoming legislation in Congress could threaten Second Amendment rights.
One America’s John Hines has more from Washington.
Video here: https://www.oann.com/dr-john-lott-upcoming-legislation-may-threaten-second-amendment/
(Excerpt) Read more at oann.com ...
Sure sounds like it to me.
First person stung by these stupid laws should defend on those grounds.
Concord and Lexington times are comin again ?
There is always proposed legislation in Congress that threatens the American way of life in general and our God-given right to keep and bear arms in particular. This is not news. We must always be vigilant - and always vote.
Geez, the video is an entire three minutes.
There are always proposals, but sometimes they are a lot more likely to pass than other times. This is one of those times, and if you want to stop this, you need to get people to contact their Senators and congressmen and help out groups such as the Crime Prevention Research Center.
I don't know that until I click on it. I have limited bandwidth here in the middle of nowhere. I prefer to read news.
Any proposed chnage creates an "it depends" outcome. The law is fundamentally arbitrary, depending on who is apply or interpreting it. There is no "rule of law," that is a myth.
On the fifth amendment grounds, red flag is not a criminal case, so the self-incrimination aspect is ephemeral. "Due process" is whatever the court tolerates, and plenty of property deprivation cases flip the burden of proof the the citizen - all upheld by SCOTUS. "Due process" can be interpreted as "the government took it, and now it is up to you to prove the taking was not warranted. Your standard of proof is 'beyond a reasonable doubt.'" Not saying that's what the standard is, just that if the courts says that constitututes due process, then that's due process for practical purposes.
On the sixth amendment grounds, red flag is not a criminal proceeding, so none of those protections attach.
On this sort of law where the government is given initiative to strip specific individuals of arms, courts tend to side with their paymaster and strong-arm enforcer, the government.
The Second Amendment is in the Constitution so it cannot be ruled "unconstitutional". Legislation is another subject as it is open to interpretation as liberals see fit. We are talking about an Amendment here and the Amendment process is the only way to change it. Judges are not part of this process because the Amendment process only involves the votes of the legislative branch and two-thirds of the states. Anything added to the Constitution is automatically "constitutional" and is thus protected from anything a judge might do.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.