Tyranny of the ATF

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppressed Poet

I’ve told you several times and cited the decision. Well-regulated means well equipped / trained / armed. Militia means all able-bodied men outside of formal military service. It’s recognized that we have an individual (not collective) right to keep & bear arms. Going even further, the prefatory clause of the 2nd Amendment is not a hindrance or prerequisite to the operative clause, but just gives an explanation as to why the operative clause (shall not be infringed) is recognized as a right. This was all clarified in the 2008 decision you are referencing. Heller was a major win for gun rights yet you keep referencing it as a reason for gun control.

---

That is your opinion, one that isn't backed by any caselaw. As a matter of fact, Heller established that the prefatory cause extended to all individuals who would bear arms and did not apply to militias only, and reinforced the federal government's responsibility as granted by the second amendment to regulate arms.

Quote:

---

2. Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court's opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller's holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those "in common use at the time" finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons.

---

The Supreme Court led by your much cherished conservative majority already decided this issue that your original post is bitching about. Your belief that the ATF is acting 'tyrannically' is nothing more than your opinion; the ATF has the Second Amendment on it's side regardless of your opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

That is your opinion, one that isn't backed by any caselaw. As a matter of fact, Heller established that the prefatory cause extended to all individuals who would bear arms and did not apply to militias only, and reinforced the federal government's responsibility as granted by the second amendment to regulate arms.



The Supreme Court led by your much cherished conservative majority already decided this issue that your original post is bitching about. Your belief that the ATF is acting 'tyrannically' is nothing more than your opinion; the ATF has the Second Amendment on it's side regardless of your opinion.

---

Part of what you said is true. All rights including the 2nd Amendment are not unlimited. The old burden of the government to implement gun control was the common use standard. Bruen took it further and says that any kind of gun control must be in the history, text, and tradition at the time the Bill of Rights was ratified. Were universal background checks and the ATF requiring FFL registration of anybody selling firearms part of the history, text, and tradition of 1791? I think not.

Edit: Also that is not my opinion. It’s the opinion of SCOTUS. Read Heller in its entirety. Justice Scalia gave a brilliant breakdown of the meaning of the 2nd amendment & a detailed historical assessment of every word. You refuse to either read or acknowledge the truth. I can’t fix stupid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppressed Poet

Part of what you said is true. All rights including the 2nd Amendment are not unlimited. The old burden of the government to implement gun control was the common use standard. Bruen took it further and says that any kind of gun control must be in the history, text, and tradition at the time the Bill of Rights was ratified. Were universal background checks and the ATF requiring FFL registration of anybody selling firearms part of the history, text, and tradition of 1791? I think not.

Edit: Also that is not my opinion. It’s the opinion of SCOTUS. Read Heller in its entirety. Justice Scalia gave a brilliant breakdown of the meaning of the 2nd amendment & a detailed historical assessment of every word. You refuse to either read or acknowledge the truth. I can’t fix stupid.

---

It's your own stupidity you seem to be struggling to address, nothing in the Heller opinion limits the ability of the federal government to regulate the registry requirements of arms sales.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

It's your own stupidity you seem to be struggling to address, nothing in the Heller opinion limits the ability of the federal government to regulate the registry requirements of arms sales.

---

1) You are a stubborn ignorant bastard and you are wrong about Heller.

2) There is no federal registry of firearms except for certain ones (for example short barreled rifles or select fire) specifically defined in the 1934 National Firearms Act. A federal registry of commonly used firearms would be illegal, according to Heller, because it infringes on the individual right to keep & bear arms.

Quote:

---

18 USC § 923(g)(4)
No such rule or regulation prescribed after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners’ Protection Act may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or dispositions be established. Nothing in this section expands or restricts the Secretary’s authority to inquire into the disposition of any firearm in the course of a criminal investigation.

---

3) Did you forget about Bruen or are you just choosing to ignore what is inconvenient for you?

Seriously Seran, go move to China or somewhere else where your bootlicking illiterate soy-loving freedom-hating disgrace for a man would be much more comfortable. You are destined to live as a subject and have no place in the United States of America.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppressed Poet

1) You are a stubborn ignorant bastard and you are wrong about Heller.

2) There is no federal registry of firearms except for certain ones (for example short barreled rifles or select fire) specifically defined in the 1934 National Firearms Act. A federal registry of commonly used firearms would be illegal, according to Heller, because it infringes on the individual right to keep & bear arms.



3) Did you forget about Bruen or are you just choosing to ignore what is inconvenient for you?

Seriously Seran, go move to China or somewhere else where your bootlicking illiterate soy-loving freedom-hating disgrace for a man would be much more comfortable. You are destined to live as a subject and have no place in the United States of America.

---

What I still don’t understand how this “infringes” on your right to own a gun. Regarding going to a store, absolutely nothing has changed, zero.. it’s still the same exact process as before. The only difference is now private sellers need to get more paperwork.

Your complaint is. It infringes because private sellers need to be on par with licensed sellers? The ability to buy a gun hasn’t changed, at all. All that has changed is, now you need to have documents to buy a gun from private sellers, instead of zero documents.

This change doesn’t make it more difficult or time consuming to buy a gun at all, as I can just go to a gun store, like before the law and buy a gun.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solkern

What I still don’t understand how this “infringes” on your right to own a gun. Regarding going to a store, absolutely nothing has changed, zero.. it’s still the same exact process as before. The only difference is now private sellers need to get more paperwork.

Your complaint is. It infringes because private sellers need to be on par with licensed sellers? The ability to buy a gun hasn’t changed, at all. All that has changed is, now you need to have documents to buy a gun from private sellers, instead of zero documents.

This change doesn’t make it more difficult or time consuming to buy a gun at all, as I can just go to a gun store, like before the law and buy a gun.

---

Maybe I want to buy one or more guns from my neighbor. This certainly makes that process more difficult. That’s an infringement. It’s really that simple.

What this is really about is the government wants to track and know who owns what firearm. That is why they previously went after “ghost guns” and that is why they are doing this. It has nothing to do with background checks, or preventing crime, or any of that. Gun control is about control, and it should be alarming to us all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppressed Poet

Well-regulated means well equipped / trained / armed. Militia means all able-bodied men outside of formal military service.

---

My hope is that Seran finally realizes how dumb his "well regulated means the government regulates!" and just goes:

https://gifdb.com/images/high/genius...wk2wbcbnb5.gif

But my guess would be that he dies on the retard hill he made.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

It's your own stupidity you seem to be struggling to address, nothing in the Heller opinion limits the ability of the federal government to regulate the registry requirements of arms sales.

---

Well, except the Constitution and the 2nd Amendment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Parkbandit

My hope is that Seran finally realizes how dumb his "well regulated means the government regulates!" and just goes:

https://gifdb.com/images/high/genius...wk2wbcbnb5.gif

But my guess would be that he dies on the retard hill he made.

---

Silvers will be $10 per before that happens.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppressed Poet

1) You are a stubborn ignorant bastard and you are wrong about Heller.

2) There is no federal registry of firearms except for certain ones (for example short barreled rifles or select fire) specifically defined in the 1934 National Firearms Act. A federal registry of commonly used firearms would be illegal, according to Heller, because it infringes on the individual right to keep & bear arms.



3) Did you forget about Bruen or are you just choosing to ignore what is inconvenient for you?

Seriously Seran, go move to China or somewhere else where your bootlicking illiterate soy-loving freedom-hating disgrace for a man would be much more comfortable. You are destined to live as a subject and have no place in the United States of America.

---

LOL, 18 USC 923 pertains only to limiting the ability of the federal government to create registries of firearms owners, or transactions. The ATF rule you're crying about is limited to requiring individuals obtain a license as a firearms dealer and be subject to a background check, which isn't a contradiction the 923. Nice try tho!