The AR-15 follies: Here we go again!

I tire of you making up sht. Where is your reference ? Oh, you’re a lawyer, sure ?

 

You have a law degree. Are you from Harvard Law ? Give a reference.
Then tell us, exactly what will they decide.....no regulations. Is that what you think ?

 

And before that ? Conservatives had a majority long before this. You think they will eliminate firearm regs and the NFA ? Tell us.

 

What laws ? You’re just babbling. You expect the court to deregulate firearms ?

 

All you’ve done is said laws will be struck down...which ones ?

 

#687:
Once the courts start enforcing Heller, laws that ban pistol grips and flash suppressors will be struck down as unconstitutional.

The same also for various laws against .50 caliber weapons, and New Jersey's law against hollow point ammo.

May-issue licensing will be a thing of the past as well.


#833:
Those are not the laws that I'm expecting Heller to topple.

I'm expecting Heller to topple laws against pistol grips and flash suppressors, laws against .50 caliber weapons, and New Jersey's law against hollow point ammo.


#875
Pistol grips and flash suppressors do not make a weapon substantially more dangerous. Having a .50 caliber does not make a weapon substantially more dangerous. Hollow point ammo is not substantially more dangerous.

Laws against such weapons are not compatible with Heller.

 

Heller does no such thing. You’re just guessing.striking down the ability of states to regulate firearms hose against all conservative values. That’s why for ten years it hasn’t been done.

You have NO QUOTES IN THE MAJORITY OPINION THAT EVEN MENTIONS SPECIFICS ABOUT FIREAM REGULATIONS OF PISTOL GRIPS, except to enforce it. Heller even HAS TO REGISTER HIS FIREARM NOW. Ten years after Heller and DC still requires that a handgun just to be kept unlocked NEEDS TO BE REGISTER YEARLY.


Where is your evidence ?
Read this.
https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/20...a-fe-parkland-heller-anniversary-constitution

 

i didn’t expect any evidence.
You didn’t disappoint us.

 

Why AR15 will face regulations.

 

No you haven’t. You’ve just babbled a wish list with no quote from Heller to back it up. I haven’t seen the actual law you’d strike down. You don’t even know how these laws are written.

You’re not quoting laws, you’re making up sht.

 

No you have not. It most states that restrict AR15 platform rifles there is no law against pistol grips. It regulates firearms with pistol grips in combination with other characteristics. So you can still have a pistol grip.
Show the law.....you’re made up statement aren’t the law.....

Not only that, you can still have an AR15 if you are licensed with all the fking pistol grips you want !

 

There are no laws on the books that prohibit law abiding citizens from owning an AR15 in any state. Neither is a law abiding citizen prohibited from possessing an automatic weapon.

 

yes. by definition, not taking a case is NOT ruling on the issue.

not taking a case is not ruling on a case.

 

Yes it does. None of those laws can be justified as serving a compelling government interest.

No. I'm basing it on which laws cannot be justified as serving a compelling government interest.

Not when it comes to striking down regulations that cannot be justified as serving a compelling government interest.

It hasn't been done because the Supreme Court has not been enforcing Heller.

I don't need any quotes. None of the laws that I listed can be justified as serving a compelling government interest.

Heller does not in any way say anything about enforcing laws against pistol grips.

That's nice.

But what does it have to do with the price of tea in China?

Hopefully the Supreme Court will start enforcing Heller soon.

I'm not sure why you expected evidence. All I was doing was reminding you of my position stated in previous posts, which you apparently had forgotten.

The only evidence that might apply to such a situation would be links to my past posts. I did in fact provide such links.

Yes I did. I provided you with links to three previous posts where I stated which laws I expected to be struck down.

Which is exactly what I was supposed to provide.

I'm sure they are available on their states' websites if you want to look them up.

Well, I've glanced at a few of them over the years. I probably haven't seen every single one.

So?

Wrong. I am telling the truth about which laws I expect to be struck down.

Yes I have. I've listed many times now which laws I expect to be struck down.

Needlessly outlawing combinations of harmless characteristics is just as unconstitutional as needlessly outlawing a single harmless characteristic.

I'm sure they are on their states' websites if you'd like to look them up.

I did not make anything up. My list of laws that I expect to be struck down accurately reflects my expectations.

Which licenses are you referring to?

Is this a word game about what sort of gun constitutes an AR-15?

 

You really haven’t read any of the State laws have you ?

 

Each state defines it as an AR15 platform with certain characteristics. It’s kind of useless talking with you because you have not read Heller and the state laws regulating UBC and the AR15 platforms .

 

I've read some of them before. None recently. I'm sure there are some that I've never read.

I have very much read Heller.

If you want to cite something from state laws, go ahead. I'll read your cites.

Note that I'm not arguing with you about background checks. I'll side with the NRA in preventing Congress from passing them, but I'm not arguing that Heller will strike them down.

 

Heller doesn’t strike any thing down. For the umpteenth time, are you claiming the court will take away a state right given to them by the constitution, the ability to regulate firearms as they see fit beyond what the Fed does....well, do you ?

 

That is incorrect. Heller sets a precedent that strikes down any gun law that cannot be justified as serving a compelling government interest.

The Constitution does not give states any such right. States are not allowed to pass gun laws that cannot be justified as serving a compelling government interest.

Now if they can justify a law as serving a compelling government interest, that's a different story. Then they are allowed to pass the law.

But they have to be able to justify their gun laws as serving a compelling government interest in order for the laws to be compatible with Heller.

 

Not only haven ‘t you read Heller, any state firearm Reg, you habevntveven read the 10 a. .

Now you can rewrite history.

Over the past decade, courts have rejected legal challenges to background checks, restrictions on assault weapons and large capacity magazines, prohibitions on gunpossession by felonsand domestic abusers, and licensing requirements to carry a gun in public. In fact, courts have rejected the vast majority of claims that the Second Amendment precludes the passage or enforcement of gun safety laws — around 90 percent, according to one recently published academic study.

 

That is incorrect. I have read Heller.

I've read some state gun laws in the past. Nothing recently.

There are surely many state gun laws that I have never read. But if there is anything pertinent to be cited in any state law, I'm sure someone will cite it.

I am quite familiar with the Tenth Amendment. That's the one that forbids all federal gun laws.

Unfortunately the Supreme Court is not enforcing it at the moment.

The short term goal is to get the courts to start enforcing Heller. We can expand our goals once Heller is being enforced.

I have done no such thing. I've acknowledged that the Supreme Court is currently not enforcing Heller.

Once the Supreme Court starts enforcing Heller, some of those laws will be struck down.

 

Not sure why you think that will impose regulations. People have been bump firing for years and years. Belt loops, rubber bands, or like this guy, practice enough and you don't need a device.

 

You won’t take **** from anyone. You will expect others to do it for you.

 

And those "others" will be armed.