- cross-posted to:
- news@kbin.social
- news@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- news@kbin.social
- news@lemmy.world
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/3049053
The Illinois State Supreme Court found a strict assault weapons ban passed after the Highland Park shooting to be constitutional in a ruling issued Friday.
You must log in or # to comment.
In the end, it doesn’t really matter what any state court thinks, you know it’s going to the Supremes.
You mean SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the United States). This is also a Supreme Court, but of a single state.
Yep and they will over turn it.
bUt ThEn OnLy CrImInAls GeT gUNs
Fun fact, the vast majority of guns used in the commission of a crime, were legally purchased. Not always by the person who used it in a crime, but often resold on the gray market to that person. There are wholesalers who buy guns in bulk (often in Georgia) and then resell those guns on the gray market.
These gray market guns are often smuggled out of the country to arm drug cartels. It’s a hell of a lot easier to get an American gun into Mexico, than it is to buy a gun legally in Mexico.
Uhh no…straw purchases are illegal…
They’re illegal, but enforcement has always been shitty. It’s getting better thanks to a law signed last year.
But more can still be done. There are still lots of loopholes in gun laws that let criminals buy guns legally.
If you are a felon you cannot own a gun. There are no loop holes. That’s a myth repeated by the anti-gun groups.
Except for all the convicted felons who own guns.
There’s also a very racist element to enforcement of that law.
Yeah they do so illegally, which is why they need to enforce the laws on the books not make up more feel good ones that don’t do shit to help curb the violence.
You’re wrong about new laws stopping violence. For example, preventing domestic abusers from having guns would drastically lower violence.
Banning gun show, or requiring all sellers to be able to run background checks, would also drastically lower the number of guns entering the hands of criminals. Several states already ban private sales without said sale being registered and run through a third party who can run a background check, but enforcement is spotty because 2a nuts hate anything that curbs the violence.
Of course, straw purchasing is already a crime. See this link I got from the ATF’s website regarding straw purchasing, https://www.dontlie.org/
So is smuggling, of course.
Illegal, but due to 2nd amendment nuts, enforcement has been lax. So straw purchases are still a thing.
Enforcement is getting better, but still has a long way to go.
“2a nuts” have little to do with lax enforcement of existing laws, even if they oppose new laws on legal private sale/purchase. The issue regarding lax enforcement on already-illegal straw purchases is more to do with the law enforcers not enforcing those current laws.
2a nuts oppose any gun laws, and yes, that includes existing laws. And who said police officers couldn’t also be 2a nuts?
While they may oppose existing laws, existing laws exist, and are still enforceable. As for police being 2A nuts themselves, some of them, but unsurprisingly most are “rules for thee not for me” types and are also the exact people who will “come and take it.” They currently do enforce those laws, just not well, so I’d argue that proves they won’t “not enforce” because they’re “2a nuts.” More likely they’d “selectively enforce” because they’re “racist” which reflects the reality we see in America today.
Furthermore, Warren v DC, Castle Rock v Gonzales, and a few other cases have made it clear that they have no obligation to protect nor serve, and so we’re left with having to protect ourselves. That and the spread out nature of our unwalkable cities puts the national average response time to emergencies at 11min (30+ for rural, about 5min for most cities, total avg is 11min), that is from the time you call, not from the time the crime starts and usually you can’t say “hold on, violent person, let me just use this phone to call the authorities before we begin assaulting me” as they usually won’t acquiesce that request, but you can learn the standard for self defense and hit him with the OC spray (if non-deadly force) or the 9mm (if deadly force) in “as quick as you can get it out.” Sometimes if he has the drop on you you have to wait to surreptitiously draw, but that is still “in the moment” not after he gets away and pray for camera footage, if I’m even still breathing.
It’s barely a 45 minute drive from Chicago to Indiana, just saying
I don’t understand why this is supposed to be some “gun laws don’t work” own instead of an argument for more gun laws.
It’s an argument for more gun control, because the current system of doing nothing is not working.
Various specific restrictions on firearms and accessories have been found constitutional. I know we’re in the Calvinball version of SCOTUS right now, but this particular finding is at least in line with historical findings.
deleted by creator
Their argument for this case was the the broad exceptions for police and jail guards violated the 14th:
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall […] deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Yeah, I’m just saying that arguing occupational differences being a class protected by the 14th is as bizarre an argument as I’ve heard, and I suspect it was done for the headlines. I’m shocked it was a close ruling, but then I was shocked by Roe being overturned.
The unfortunate result of a corrupt court putting party politics over our rights and the constitution.
