Supreme Court won't overrule gun ownership restrictions
- Thread starter usmarine0352_2005
- Start date
- Status
Yes, an astonishing number of gun owners support storage and lock regulations, and support background checks.
The opposition uses this fact to label certain practices as something other than what they are. For instance, you can create a 'mandatory waiting period' by saying all gun transfers need a background check and then making sure that check takes a month.
I'd love for there to be a truly instant background check, one that takes 90 seconds or less, and one that isn't legally required but the use of it makes the seller legally immune from criminal or civil lawsuit due to the wrong person getting a gun that once was in the seller's control.
The opposition uses this fact to label certain practices as something other than what they are. For instance, you can create a 'mandatory waiting period' by saying all gun transfers need a background check and then making sure that check takes a month.
I'd love for there to be a truly instant background check, one that takes 90 seconds or less, and one that isn't legally required but the use of it makes the seller legally immune from criminal or civil lawsuit due to the wrong person getting a gun that once was in the seller's control.
old lady new shooter
Member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2015
- Messages
- 30,646
Mechanical push buttons sound much better to me, I would never feel comfortable trusting my life to electronic gadgetry.
gbran
Member
If the 2A had been defended a fraction as much as the 1A, we wouldn't be having the cases and debates.
Bartholomew Roberts
Member
JSH1 said:
No. It just means the Supreme Court didn't overturn the decision. The Supreme Court didn't hear a single lower court case on whether the Second Amendment was an individual right until 2007. When they finally did hear a case, they ended up overturning a long list of earlier cases they hadn't chosen to hear previously.
As a practical effect, all this case means is that under similar fact patterns, similarly worded storage laws are probably legal in the Ninth Circuit's area of jurisdiction.
Guy B. Meredith
Member
As mentioned in a previous post, it looks like this is not really the right case or time.
I am all for keeping others from putting their filthy hands on my property and want an intelligent solution, not another fantasy based pile of smelly stuff.
SSN VET and all,
A note on the vault. Think "smart guns" and which of these access controls you would prefer for a carry weapon. Too, pray that the idiots don't see "smart guns" as the preferred lockup method.
I don't have fingerprints, as is the case of other seniors, people working with their hands in water much of the time and people working with abrasive material (modeling clay?) so that is out.
The fact that I would probably stumble over a code while trying to wake up might be a good thing to make sure the fog is out and I can be sure of the target/situation.
I don't trust batteries or a system that locks out after too many panic driven and sleep fog clouded tries so that is out.
Guess I'm looking for a purely mechanical lock.
I am all for keeping others from putting their filthy hands on my property and want an intelligent solution, not another fantasy based pile of smelly stuff.
SSN VET and all,
A note on the vault. Think "smart guns" and which of these access controls you would prefer for a carry weapon. Too, pray that the idiots don't see "smart guns" as the preferred lockup method.
I don't have fingerprints, as is the case of other seniors, people working with their hands in water much of the time and people working with abrasive material (modeling clay?) so that is out.
The fact that I would probably stumble over a code while trying to wake up might be a good thing to make sure the fog is out and I can be sure of the target/situation.
I don't trust batteries or a system that locks out after too many panic driven and sleep fog clouded tries so that is out.
Guess I'm looking for a purely mechanical lock.
- Status
Similar threads
