RE: Hypothetical For Gun Rights Advocates
March 28, 2018 at 11:07 am
(This post was last modified: March 29, 2018 at 4:54 pm by Jackalope.)
(March 28, 2018 at 9:18 am)vorlon13 Wrote: Hell, for 0.001% of the dollar value of the litigation and brouhaha necessary to just modify the Second Amendment we could vaccinate every third world kid for EVERYTHING.
This is probably true, but it isn't necessary to modify the 2nd to do effective things. The National Firearms Act of 1934 treats machineguns, silencers, short barrel rifles/shotguns, and other types of arms differently from everything else. It has, so far, passed constitutional muster. You *can* own those at least under Federal law (your state may vary), but there are a lot of hoops to jump through to purchase one. I won't go into the details. Suffice it to say that you are thoroughly vetted to make damn sure you are not prohibited.
The point is that there does not seem to be a Constitutional impediment to place other classes of weapons deemed to be a public safety hazard under those or similar restrictions into a similar category. I also don't see a Constitutional impediment to safe storage laws, setting national training requirements for concealed carry or other related issues concerning firearms in the commons, and that sort of thing. I don't see a mass confiscation or buyback ever happening.
To answer the OP, I'm going to answer it in two parts.
Back when I was a gun nut (I was one of the very extreme ones that thought any regulation was an infringement and therefore unconstitutional. I would have declined to participate in such a program, at least with respect to the guns I owned that didn't have a paper trail leading to me (i.e. they were bought in private party face-to-face sales with no background check or paperwork. I had an AR-15 and many others that fall into that category.)
Clearly I don't hold that position any longer, and haven't since I got out of the gun nut bubble. I don't even own a gun any longer. However, if I did, I would comply. Rule of law and all of that.
My interpretation of what the 2nd amendment means hasn't changed much, except in that I now think that there's plenty that can and should be done constitutionally.
