So your question is the timely manner in which a person can exercise their right to bear arms? We would have to establish what a reasonable period of time would be. What is reasonable in this instance. What must the government establish with that reasonable amount of time to determine whether you can legally purchase and bear that arm? I am not sure how long it takes to do a thorough background check. If it takes three days to do a thorough background check than 3+1 (you never know what might come up).
Personally, I don't agree with havening to wait. But to say it is violating your right to get the firearm, that's not the case...you are getting it, and depending on your sense of what is a reasonable amount of time, you could be feeling that you are being violated. Too bad we don't have a consensus on what constituted "timely." And at what point that infringement becomes a violation of said right.
One could contend there is not right to purchase arms, and that could be extended to manufacturing arms. If arms can not be legally purchased, transferred or manufactured how can they be kept or carried? You might think I am being silly with this argument, but it is basically the federal governments approach to machine guns. Now the right to keep and bear machine guns is almost impossible.
I believe that machine guns should be sold to the general population the same way that all other firearms are sold. The reasoning behind banning or restricting AW's makes no sense to me and is unConstitutional as far as I am concerned...but, I am not a Constitutional scholar, nor am I a Justice of SCOTUS....so I don't get to make the rulings
A waiting period might not be much of an infringement but it is an infringement none the less, as are taxes on arms, and almost any law we have that pertains to them.
"Shall not be infringed." Hmmm, I wonder, is charging tax on the firearm or any other firearm tax infringing on your right to bear arms? So your stance is any process you must go through in order to bear arms is infringing?
SCOTUS and the constitution can only protect not establish rights. Rights are supposed to only be bounded by the rights of another individual. How is it my rights need to be bounded by a waiting period to keep my rights from infringing on another's rights?
In their protection they can establish rights. You have a right to bear arms is bounded by the publics right to make at least a crude attempt at not giving arms to bear to a lunatic...that is all I can think. Say I am clinically insane, where does my right to bear arms conflict with your right to live in a society that doesn't endorse sales of firearms to clinically insane people?
I was about to make a federal government argument and remembered the topic is waiting periods, which thankfully are not at a federal level. I never have and never shall willfully live in a state that violates me with a waiting period.
I live in Utah currently and if I move, it will be back to Washington....California can fall into the sea for all I care, and any other commie state that doesn't permit the lawful bear and carry of arms.