Is Licensing or Registration "reasonable" under Heller and McDonald?

JohnH said:

Interesting, your link is to the Heller decision, not the McDonald decision.

Click to expand...

Oops, thanks, I fixed it.

TFred

KansasMustang said:

...(as opposed to the states)...

Click to expand...

Please provide a source for your evident quote or explain this snippet. It is not true per se and it is not true in any context that I can imagine. English common law is the origin of almost all American state law, with the notable exception of IIRC Louisiana and the Napoleonic Code.

Dreamer said:

The phrase "reasonable restrictions" is just the anti's new version of "keeping guns out of the hands of the wrong kinds of people". It is "code" for "not letting poor, black, brown, or politically incorrect people have guns".

They've realized that the pro-2A world (and a growing segment of the minority community and civil rights activist community) has figured out who they REALLY mean when they say "the wrong kinds of people", and they've just changed the wording of their racist and classist ideology in an attempt to further confuse the public and mask their true intent.

Anyone who uses this term needs to be publicly "outed" as the racist and classist elitist that they are...

"Reasonable Restriction" is simply 21st Century Jim Crow.

Click to expand...

What's happened is that they've "outed" THEMSELVES.

When given the opportunity to support the supposed "reasonable restrictions" they claimed they wanted, INSTEAD the supported not one, but TWO outright bans on handguns.

They're like the guy who says he just opposes affirmative action who gets caught calling for the repeal of the 13th Amendment and the reinstatement of slavery. It was all a lie from the start, just as I've been telling people all along.

Now for the pessimistic side.

Heller and Mcdonald were decided 5 to 4. All it takes is one of the majority dying or retireing while a democrat president is in office. Then all these possible follow up cases could be decided that all gun controls short of bans on hanguns in the home are reasonable.

vmaxanarchist said:

Heller and Mcdonald were decided 5 to 4. All it takes is one of the majority dying or retireing while a democrat president is in office. Then all these possible follow up cases could be decided that all gun controls short of bans on hanguns in the home are reasonable.

Click to expand...

I'm afraid it's even worse than that. Heller was the first case to affirm that gun ownership is an individual right at all. Despite the overwhelming magnitude of historical documentation and precedent, we are still only one vote away from virtually deleting the Second Amendment from the Constitution altogether.

Sotomayor bold face lied to the Judiciary Committee during her confirmation hearings, claiming that Heller was "settled law" and then at first opportunity, dissented from McDonald which is largely based on Heller. I don't expect any Democratically appointed nominee to the SCOTUS in the foreseeable future to ever again be truthful in the process. The entire confirmation process has become a total sham.

We are about as on the brink as we can be right now.

TFred

According to Chicago King Daley

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?77849-Chicago-s-Tough-New-Gun-Ordinance