logo Sign In

Post #1173384

Author
Mrebo
Parent topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Link to post in topic
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/1173384/action/topic#1173384
Date created
20-Feb-2018, 7:42 PM

TV’s Frink said:

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-court-guns-20180220-story.html

The Supreme Court made clear again Tuesday that the government has broad power to restrict and regulate firearms, dismissing a 2nd Amendment challenge to California’s 10-day waiting period for new gun purchases.

While the court has ruled that the 2nd Amendment protects the right of law-abiding citizens to own guns, the justices have repeatedly refused to go further by blocking strict gun regulations, including state bans on the sale of semi-automatic weapons or limits on who can carry a weapon in public.

Dissenting alone, Justice Clarence Thomas said “the 2nd Amendment is a disfavored right in this court.”

In 2008 and 2010, the high court struck down ordinances in Washington, D.C., and Chicago that prohibited the private possession of handguns as violations of 2nd Amendment. Americans have a right to have guns at home for self-defense, the court said in 5-4 decisions.

But since then, the justices have turned down gun rights advocates who have sued to challenge gun regulations based on the 2nd Amendment.

The first sentence isn’t correct because the Court only declined to hear the case, and the Justices can have all kinds of reasons beyond the merits. I don’t think the 8 other Justices would vote to uphold the law if they decided to hear the case. But this is a good example of the leeway states have had (so far) in passing gun control laws.