Researcher’s Note: California has always been an experimental
state for the Liberals and their stealth laws. Example: You can have all your
guns but we regulate the hell out of your ammo. Nope can’t use ammo with lead,
bad for the environment! They know if they can get a law passed in California
it will eventually trickle into the other states, and already has. Their attack
on our Second Amendment is a high priority on their agenda list. Because of our
Second Amendment we are still free. Other countries have already been defeated
by their agenda, and yes their agenda is worldwide. This is not about Gun
Control this is about your freedom! This is the result of Gun Control in
Australia.
Australia's Gun Ban NOT
Working So Well
Military.com
Posted
Aug 07, 2012 by GunFun
Justice Thomas RIPS Supreme Court For Ignoring Second
Amendment: 'The Right To Keep And Bear Arms Is ... This Court's Constitutional
Orphan'
ByBen Shapiro
@benshapiro
February 20, 2018
On Tuesday, Justice Clarence Thomas issued
a blistering rebuke to his Supreme Court colleagues, as well as to lower
courts that have refused to treat the Second Amendment with the same level of
honor as other rights enshrined in the Constitution.
Thomas wrote a dissent against his Supreme Court
colleagues refusing to take up the case of California’s 10-day waiting period
for buying a gun. Under California law, gun buyers — even those who already own
guns — must wait ten days before picking up their guns from the store. It
doesn’t matter whether the background checks have already been run; purchasers
must wait. The idea is that these potential buyers will have second thoughts
about owning a gun, and decide not to pick up the gun after all.
The state of California provided little or no evidence to
show that such cooling-off periods impact in any way either suicide rates or
crime rates, particularly as applied to those who already have gun licenses and
concealed carry permits. That didn’t stop the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
from upholding the law on the basis that the purchaser “may want to purchase a
larger capacity weapon that will do more damage when fired into a crowd.” That
contention was entirely speculative, of course.
But this is the lowest possible standard for
constitutional review. As Thomas points out, the Heller case says Courts
may not “decide on a case-by-case basis whether the right is really worth
insisting upon.” The Court explicitly shot down “rational-basis scrutiny.”
All of this, wrote Thomas “is symptomatic of the lower
courts’ general failure to afford the Second Amendment the respect due an
enumerated constitutional right. If a lower court treated another right so
cavalierly, I have little doubt that this Court would intervene. But as
evidenced by our continued inaction in this area, the Second Amendment is a
disfavored right in this Court.”
As Thomas points out, if a state placed a ten-day waiting
period on abortions, the Supreme Court would be quick to step in with a review.
The Ninth Circuit even struck down a county’s 50-day waiting period for
nude-dancing licenses. And the Ninth Circuit struck down traditional marriage
laws for supposed lack of evidence, despite thousands of years of human
history. Thomas concludes, “The right to keep and bear arms is apparently this
Court’s constitutional orphan.”
Thomas, of course, is right. And the judiciary’s
willingness to stand by and watch the Second Amendment dismantled piecemeal is
an abdication of Constitutional duty on a grand scale.
Read More: Clarence Thomas Second Amendment
No comments:
Post a Comment