I have not read the nuts and bolts of this bill to really comment yet, and forgive the source.
I can understand those who reject it outright due to who signed it etc, but “on paper” most of it does not sound terrible. Again, devil is the details and need to see what the specific lingo used, but so far, it’s not totally worthless. Most concerning to me from what I see so far is red flag aspects, which can be used easily as a run around of Const Rights to remove guns minus any due process. Anyone read the actual bill?
Yes, I fully “get” the dislike of any win for those who’s ultimate goal is to see us all disarmed, but we still have to work with what we have (and we now have this bill) and due to the massive win that was SCOTUS decision, those forces have been set back decades:
Thank goodness, now we are really safe and there will be no more violent crimes. Just like tearing down statues and redesigning a syrup bottle label eliminated racism, criminals will now start obeying the NEW laws.
It will, however, allow those convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence crimes to restore their gun rights after five years if they haven’t committed other crimes.
The rest is dubious at best. Seems to devolve a lot of the issues to states, and you can guess that the bluest-blue states will use the money to make things worse with blatantly unconstitutional red flag laws, and the red states will either pass, or maybe, hopefully, do something useful.
Nowhere near as bad as what it could have been, of course.
After the SCOTUS decision all the state junk that exists now or is about to be added should be relatively easier to challenge in court.
As always, depends on how it’s actually enforced, etc, but some of it does not sound like all it does is harm law abiding gun owners per se or strictly feel good BS that only impacts the law abiding.
Ive not read it. IF… it contains the “red flag” laws I really believe thatll be eventually ruled unconstitutional.
Outside of that- this aint nothing. Theyve effectively done really NOTHING. What am I missing?
They went from outright banning most semi auto’s…9mm’s…standard cap mags, online ammo & gun sales, ect., to…expanded background checks?
They got NOTHING major they wanted, unless Im missing something. We all know theyll keep on, that aint breaking news. But for the Potato-in-Chief to act like he just signed another AWB…nah, he didnt. Blue states are gonna blue state until SCOTUS rules on their shit. Red states will red. As far as I can tell right now, nobody here cant do today, what they could do yesterday, last week, last year. Its all for show.
Call me paranoid, but I just see a little more camel in the tent than there was yesterday. Not much more, and it’s not terribly offensive, but sooner or later it leads to the whole camel if you let it continue.
As others have said, selective enforcement and idealogical lawfare is a thing. This is yet another potential tool in that direction.
It’s a ratchet- a lot of states already had all this stuff. Mine does. So for most people its a nothing, maybe even a positive if you and and girlfriend went wrong.
Let them have this small victory(?) because the NY SCOTUS case far overweighs anything here. The new battle will be fighting to new tweaks that they will be allowed.
AWB and mag limit bans need to be struck down NOW. Don’t send the pending cases back to lower courts, we need SCOTUS decisions that are clear on the issue. That way it is harder when in 5-10 years when the dems get a majority on the court, there is as little room for them to screw around with precedent.
Too bad SCOTUS has already done all it will for cases this term–right now they’re in that stage of the last few days after final exams but before the end of the school year. Barring something truly spectacular, they won’t even look at anything more until October when the new term starts.
Must be nice having a job that gives you three months’ paid vacation every year…
They didn’t write any national red flag laws because they knew it would get challenged…they are sending $$$$ to the states & letting each one come up with their own rules. Hopefully Texas will have concrete due process and/or use the funds to harden schools / focus on the mental who slip through. I can also see the abused boyfriend / girlfriend point getting sideways with false claims. I’m sure a handful of states will go fubar & something to watch down the road.
I think this is a win- previously a person convicted of a felony could get their rights restored but a DV conviction fvcked a person for life and was ex post facto. Although a conviction can be sealed, in practice it NEVER happened.
I also have no heartburn with the expanded background for young buyers. We have plenty of gangbangers that turn 18 and are magically “clean” and go buy guns for the crew.
As for the rest, we shall see…
ETA: not condoning DV, but it’s the only misdemeanor with such significant ramifications. I knew a guy that had a tumultuous relationship with his wife, she lied about battery, he plead to disturbing the peace with no penalty. The Lautenberg amendment passed a few years later and he lost his ability to possess a gun. She told a judge that she had lied, but judge refused to seal the case. He got screwed.
I am not saying the bill is a nothingburger, but it is no where near as big a deal as the media portrayed it (on both sides). And partially fixing the permaban for misdemeanors is actually a huge win (I have seen extremely trivial conduct charged as misdemeanor family violence).
IIRC, if you have the misfortune to be targeted by a complete malicious jackass even simple “raised voice” can be arrested and charged as Misdemeanor DV.
How that ever passed Constitutional muster is beyond me: a misdemeanor no less AND being ex post facto. I wonder if it was ever challenged and made it to the SCOTUS?
Yeah, not condoning wife-beaters at all, I find it disgusting and lived with a [sometimes] violent father. I get it. But just like with red flag laws, there is much chicanery afoot and flat-out lying that takes place by women in domestic situations. Certainly in enough cases to warrant a dead-stop on denying a Constitutional right over it.
Yep. Throw a phone or bust a TV? DV, no guns forever for you. I hope Lautenberg is rolling over in his grave, libtard POS that he was. From New Jersey no less (go figure).