RE: Common Sense on Guns
I'll repeat my comment above: "Who cares? The Constitution also says that black people are only 3/5ths of a person. Also, the 2nd Amendment is an ammendment, but the right to impose taxes and regulate commerce are part of the original Constitution, so there is nothing unconstitutional about my proposal. And, if there were, then a Constitutional amendment would be desirable."
Something being in the Constitution doesn't make it right. Also, the 2nd Amendment right to bear arms is basically predicated on formation of national guards ("well-regulated Militia, being necessary for the security of a free State"). Contrary to conservative narratives, the right to bear arms actually has nothing to do with home defense, or security against government tyranny, but rather to ensure strong national defense and keep the State from being overthrown by invaders. The logic was actually that the central government ought not to have any standing army in times of peace, so well-regulated Militias (national guards) at the state level were necessary to national defense. Also, the right of interpretation goes to the Supreme Court, which has ruled that 2nd Amendment rights are not absolute, so government can regulate firearms (it just cannot outright ban them). So, constitutionally speaking, my proposals are all on strong footing, regardless.
Also, you are wrong when you say "Except that we already have restrictions on who can buy firearms. Specifically, your assertion about making it more difficult for domestic abusers to purchase. They're already prohibited possessors."
That is totally untrue. Domestic violence doesn't generally result in felony charges, so people who regularly beat their wives and get arrested for domestic violence are still allowed to own guns.
LOL, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
Yeah, I responded to that ridiculous sentiment there. Let's address the other one.
First, the militia clause isn't a restriction on the right of the people to keep and bear arms. The milita is necessary for a free state SO the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
You're vaguely correct that the purpose was to avoid a standing army. However, you are grossly mistaken about the purpose of the Constitution in general if you think it allows state militia formation. The National Guard is a state entity that can be called to federal service, which is actually a separate organization than the State National Guards.
The National Guard is also separate, legally, by federal code, from the unorganized militia which consists of every male aged between17 and 45.
There is no such thing as a militia requirement to keep and bear arms. Per SCOTUS, the 2nd Amendment is an individual right, protected but not granted by the Constitution, and applies to the states just as it does to the federal government. Heller, Cruikshank, and McDonald.
And you're still ignoring taxing a Constitutional right. Apply your idea to the first amendment. Legal? Not a chance in hell.
Okay, whatever...
Back to the point, SCOTUS' interpretation of the 2nd Amendment does allow for everything I have proposed.
https://www.google.com/amp/thehill.com/opinion/civil-rights/356087-gun-control-is-constitutional-just-ask-the-supreme-court%3famp
Gun control, per the Supreme Court, does not violate the Constitution, so long as gun control doesn't take the form of outright banning firearms.
I'll just point out that when your argument has to be "who cares" and "whatever," you might wanna reassess your original ideas. "Reasonable restrictions" are as minimal as possible.
Full on literal taxation of a fundamental, Constitutional right is neither minimal nor reasonable. You have no idea of the reach and ramifications of your proposals, let alone anything beyond a vague knowledge of the second amendment or any knowledge whatsoever of Constitutional authority.
Also, that article is an opinion piece by someone with a very obvious agenda that is attempting to boil an intricate and complicated issue to "the NRA sucks."
There is no expert opinion there, just someone that really really wants gun control.