From my research, it looks like New York state has a background check law similar to ours here in CA.

[TurtleDude]

The whole Constitutionality "originalist" argument regarding the Second Amendment is moronic. This originalist garbage interpretation of the Constitution didn't start until the conservative movement of the 1980s and that is just a fact. Nobody was willing to die on their ****ing cross over the Second Amendment for the first 200 years of this country's history.

The NRA has duped weak-minded individuals such as yourselves into believing your precious gun rights are always in jeopardy. That started with Reagan's election in 1980, which was the first time the NRA ever endorsed a Presidential candidate.

can you tell us where the federal government was properly delegated any gun control power-as opposed to something the FDR court created?

what is really stupid (in addition to calling other posters weak minded-given how pathetic your post is) is claiming our rights are not in jeopardy when if people like you were in power, you'd ban guns ASAP

 

[Rucker61]

The whole Constitutionality "originalist" argument regarding the Second Amendment is moronic. This originalist garbage interpretation of the Constitution didn't start until the conservative movement of the 1980s and that is just a fact.

In US v Cruikshank,1876, SCOTUS recognized that "The right there specified is that of "bearing arms for a lawful purpose." This is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence." The decision recognized the right of two former slaves to keep a bear arms, two men who were not in the militia, would not have been allowed to be in the militia, in a state where the militia had been disbanded.
Without the recognition of an individual right to keep and bear arms, Miller, whose entire appeal was based upon that right, would have no standing to have his case reviewed by SCOTUS.


Pennsylvania: 1776: That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the state; and as standing armies in the time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; And that the military should be kept under strict subordination, to, and governed by, the civil power. Declaration of Rights, cl. XIII.
Vermont: That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the State -- and as standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; and that the military should be kept under strict subordination to and governed by the civil power. Ch. I, art. 16 (enacted 1777, ch. I, art. 15).

Kentucky: 1792: "That the right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned." Art. XII, § 23.

Ohio: 1802: "That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the State; and as standing armies, in time of peace, are dangerous to liberty, they shall not be kept up, and that the military shall be kept under strict subordination to the civil power." Art. VIII, § 20.
Indiana: 1816: That the people have a right to bear arms for the defense of themselves and the State, and that the military shall be kept in strict subordination to the civil power. Art. I, § 20.

Mississippi: 1817: "Every citizen has a right to bear arms, in defence of himself and the State." Art. I, § 23.

Connecticut: Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state. Art. I, § 15 (enacted 1818, art. I, § 17).

Missouri: 1820: "That the people have the right peaceably to assemble for their common good, and to apply to those vested with the powers of government for redress of grievances by petition or remonstrance; and that their right to bear arms in defence of themselves and of the State cannot be questioned." Art. XIII, § 3.



The constitutions and courts of the various states indicated an individual rights viewpoint at least 66 times..

State Constitutional Right to Keep and Bear Arms Provisions

 

[TurtleDude]

In US v Cruikshank,1876, SCOTUS recognized that "The right there specified is that of "bearing arms for a lawful purpose." This is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence." The decision recognized the right of two former slaves to keep a bear arms, two men who were not in the militia, would not have been allowed to be in the militia, in a state where the militia had been disbanded.
Without the recognition of an individual right to keep and bear arms, Miller, whose entire appeal was based upon that right, would have no standing to have his case reviewed by SCOTUS.


Pennsylvania: 1776: That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the state; and as standing armies in the time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; And that the military should be kept under strict subordination, to, and governed by, the civil power. Declaration of Rights, cl. XIII.
Vermont: That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the State -- and as standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; and that the military should be kept under strict subordination to and governed by the civil power. Ch. I, art. 16 (enacted 1777, ch. I, art. 15).

Kentucky: 1792: "That the right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned." Art. XII, § 23.

Ohio: 1802: "That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the State; and as standing armies, in time of peace, are dangerous to liberty, they shall not be kept up, and that the military shall be kept under strict subordination to the civil power." Art. VIII, § 20.
Indiana: 1816: That the people have a right to bear arms for the defense of themselves and the State, and that the military shall be kept in strict subordination to the civil power. Art. I, § 20.

Mississippi: 1817: "Every citizen has a right to bear arms, in defence of himself and the State." Art. I, § 23.

Connecticut: Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state. Art. I, § 15 (enacted 1818, art. I, § 17).

Missouri: 1820: "That the people have the right peaceably to assemble for their common good, and to apply to those vested with the powers of government for redress of grievances by petition or remonstrance; and that their right to bear arms in defence of themselves and of the State cannot be questioned." Art. XIII, § 3.



The constitutions and courts of the various states indicated an individual rights viewpoint at least 66 times..

State Constitutional Right to Keep and Bear Arms Provisions

I don't think these obvious facts matter to those who hate gun owners

 

[Rucker61]

The NRA has duped weak-minded individuals such as yourselves into believing your precious gun rights are always in jeopardy. That started with Reagan's election in 1980, which was the first time the NRA ever endorsed a Presidential candidate.

Amend the Lautenberg Amendment to cover boyfriends, dating.
Universal background checks.
Repeal PLCAA - Allow gun manufacturers to be sued out of business
Ban "assault weapons"
Ban "large capacity magazines"
Buy-back programs
Impose red flag laws
Ban 3-D printing of guns
Ban bump stocks.
Permit to purchase licensing system
"Charleston" loophole
Mandatory notification of stolen guns
"Hate crime" loophole
No "ghost guns".
Eliminate campus carry
Raise the legal age to purchase a firearm
Increase taxes on guns and ammunition specifically to reduce the number of lawful citizens exercising a Constitutionally protected right
Limit the number of firearms that can be purchased in a month by law abiding citizens.
Ban silencers
Expand gun free zones to universities and colleges

 

[RIP U.S. Democracy]

can you tell us where the federal government was properly delegated any gun control power-as opposed to something the FDR court created?

what is really stupid (in addition to calling other posters weak minded-given how pathetic your post is) is claiming our rights are not in jeopardy when if people like you were in power, you'd ban guns ASAP

Yet no Republicans were ever terrified of the Democrats taking away gun rights prior to Reagan. Why is that?

The only thing that changed is the NRA systematically brain-washing weak minded individuals such as yourselves and Republicans started repeating NRA talking points, starting in the 1980s.

The NRA actually endorsed the 1968 gun control law passed by Congress, which was also supported by CA governor Ronald Reagan. The NRA was actually sensible before they were infiltrated by white supremacists starting in the late 1970s.

 

[Rucker61]

Yet no Republicans were ever terrified of the Democrats taking away gun rights prior to Reagan. Why is that?

Because the government under the Democrats sold hundreds of thousand of military surplus magazine fed semiautomatic rifles to civilians without a background check and mailed them directly to the buyer's homes. Where are those Democrats?

The only thing that changed is the NRA systematically brain-washing weak minded individuals such as yourselves and Republicans started repeated NRA talking points, starting in the 1980s.

Well, you should also note that various organizations started trying to ban handguns, too, as early as 1974.

The NRA actually endorsed the 1968 gun control law passed by Congress, which was also supported by CA governor Ronald Reagan. The NRA was actually sensible before they were infiltrated by white supremacists starting in the late 1970s.

Are the Democrats trying to take our gun rights away now?

 

[RIP U.S. Democracy]

In US v Cruikshank,1876, SCOTUS recognized that "The right there specified is that of "bearing arms for a lawful purpose." This is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence." The decision recognized the right of two former slaves to keep a bear arms, two men who were not in the militia, would not have been allowed to be in the militia, in a state where the militia had been disbanded.
Without the recognition of an individual right to keep and bear arms, Miller, whose entire appeal was based upon that right, would have no standing to have his case reviewed by SCOTUS.


Pennsylvania: 1776: That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the state; and as standing armies in the time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; And that the military should be kept under strict subordination, to, and governed by, the civil power. Declaration of Rights, cl. XIII.
Vermont: That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the State -- and as standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; and that the military should be kept under strict subordination to and governed by the civil power. Ch. I, art. 16 (enacted 1777, ch. I, art. 15).

Kentucky: 1792: "That the right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned." Art. XII, § 23.

Ohio: 1802: "That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the State; and as standing armies, in time of peace, are dangerous to liberty, they shall not be kept up, and that the military shall be kept under strict subordination to the civil power." Art. VIII, § 20.
Indiana: 1816: That the people have a right to bear arms for the defense of themselves and the State, and that the military shall be kept in strict subordination to the civil power. Art. I, § 20.

Mississippi: 1817: "Every citizen has a right to bear arms, in defence of himself and the State." Art. I, § 23.

Connecticut: Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state. Art. I, § 15 (enacted 1818, art. I, § 17).

Missouri: 1820: "That the people have the right peaceably to assemble for their common good, and to apply to those vested with the powers of government for redress of grievances by petition or remonstrance; and that their right to bear arms in defence of themselves and of the State cannot be questioned." Art. XIII, § 3.



The constitutions and courts of the various states indicated an individual rights viewpoint at least 66 times..

State Constitutional Right to Keep and Bear Arms Provisions

The idea that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual's right to carry a gun, rather than the people's right to form armed militias to provide for the common defense, did not become the official position of the NRA until the 1970s.

Richard Nixon in 1972 -- "I don't know why any individual should have a right to have a revolver in his house". Nixon tried to get Congress to ban Saturday night specials in 1972. Reagan made similar comments as governor of CA.

Gun control was a non-partisan issue until the late 1970s.

 

[RIP U.S. Democracy]

Because the government under the Democrats sold hundreds of thousand of military surplus magazine fed semiautomatic rifles to civilians without a background check and mailed them directly to the buyer's homes. Where are those Democrats?

Shit, the same thing goes on right now in 2022. It's even worse now. What are you talking about???

Well, you should also note that various organizations started trying to ban handguns, too, as early as 1974.

Yeah, with Republican support. Including Nixon and Reagan.

Are the Democrats trying to take our gun rights away now?

Only in the minds of the easily duped, such as yourself.

 

[Rucker61]

The idea that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual's right to carry a gun, rather than the people's right to form armed militias to provide for the common defense, did not become the official position of the NRA until the 1970s.

The idea that a right that wasn't dependent upon the existence of the Constitution had anything to do with forming a militia who only existed because of the Constitution is weapons grade cognitive dissonance.

Regardless of the position of the NRA, the idea that citizens have the right to keep and bear arms predates the Constitution, and indeed the same legislatures who affirmed that right in the state constitutions were the same legislature who ratified the Second Amendment. Do you think they held contrary positions with regards to an individual rights?

Richard Nixon in 1972 -- "I don't know why any individual should have a right to have a revolver in his house". Nixon tried to get Congress to ban Saturday night specials in 1972. Reagan made similar comments as governor of CA.

Gun control was a non-partisan issue until the late 1970s.

Gun control wasn't really an issue until 1968.

 

[Rucker61]

Shit, the same thing goes on right now in 2022. It's even worse now. What are you talking about???

Under the CMP both the Truman Administration and the Kennedy Administration sold US military surplus semiautomatic rifles to the citizens of the US for as little as $20, shipping included, with no background checks. Were those obviously military grade weapons only shipped out to militia members or to ordinary citizens of the country?

Yeah, with Republican support. Including Nixon and Reagan.

With limited Republican support, or we would have seen bipartisan bans. BTW, I'm not a Republican, so that path isn't going to yield you any points.

Only in the minds of the easily duped, such as yourself.

You must have skipped right over post 404.

 

[RIP U.S. Democracy]

The idea that a right that wasn't dependent upon the existence of the Constitution had anything to do with forming a militia who only existed because of the Constitution is weapons grade cognitive dissonance.

Regardless of the position of the NRA, the idea that citizens have the right to keep and bear arms predates the Constitution, and indeed the same legislatures who affirmed that right in the state constitutions were the same legislature who ratified the Second Amendment. Do you think they held contrary positions with regards to an individual rights?

In a searing critique of the Originalist interpretation of the Second Amendment in the 1980s, historian Garry Wills pointed out that the Second Amendment had everything to do with the common defense and nothing to do with hunting: "One does not bear arms against a rabbit."

Gun control wasn't really an issue until 1968.

All sensible Americans agreed that gun control was necessary, that why. Including Nixon and Reagan. Including the freaking NRA.

It wasn't until the 1980s, after the NRA changed leadership and brainwashed you all, that you Repugs completely lost your minds.

You all actually think that your precious gun rights are more important than the lives of innocent children. That is sick and demented and you all should be ashamed of yourselves.

 

[RIP U.S. Democracy]

Only after Branson Carter became executive vice president of the NRA in 1977 was it revealed that he had been convicted of murder in Laredo, TX, in 1931, when he was 17 years old.

The NRA endorsed Reagan in 1980 after Carter became leader of the NRA.

These were the types of people leading the new NRA...the same NRA that has completely duped you Repugs for the past 40 years.

 

[Rucker61]

In a searing critique of the Originalist interpretation of the Second Amendment in the 1980s, historian Garry Wills pointed out that the Second Amendment had everything to do with the common defense and nothing to do with hunting: "One does not bear arms against a rabbit."

In a rather interesting display of ignorance of the state constitutions of the time of the ratification of the Bill of Rights, Garry Wills ignore the fact that multiple states had affirmed an individual right to keep and bear arms for self defense starting in 1776 and continuing into the 21st century.

The Second Amendment, like all of the Bill of Rights, doesn't define or limit the right. The Constitution enumerates the rights of the federal government; the Bill of Rights restricts the powers of the federal government. Nothing in the Bill of Rights restricts the rights of the people.

Given the powers of the federal government in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 16 and Article 2, Section 2, the Second Amendment cannot protect the arms of the militia. No one has a right to be in the militia, and the militia has no right to any arms not granted by Congress.

All sensible Americans agreed that gun control was necessary, that why. Including Nixon and Reagan. Including the freaking NRA.

Och, the "No True Scotsman" fallacy. "Gun control" is such a arbitrary term as to be meaningless. We have gun control. We will oppose unconstitutional, ineffective and unenforceable gun control.

Again, I DGAF what Nixon and Reagan wanted. Are you telling us you're embracing all of their policies and holding them up as scions of civil rights?

It wasn't until the 1980s, after the NRA brainwashed you all, that you Repugs completely lost your minds.

Again, not a Republican. I wasn't a gun owner until 2012.

You all actually think that your precious gun rights are more important than the lives of innocent children.

No, the Founders thought that. The Bill of Rights protects all kinds of criminals. We could end child porn and drug dealing if we simply tossed the 4th. We wouldn't have to worry about lives lost to recidivist criminals if we could ignore the 5th, 6th and 8th Amendments.

SCOTUS affirmed in Warren v DC and Castle Rock v Gonzales that the government had no Constitutional obligation to protect the lives of anyone.

That is sick and demented and you all should be ashamed of yourselves.

I'm neither a member of Congress or hold a seat on any judgeship. I even live in a Blue state.