Why America’s Gun Laws Are in Chaos

[wew3]

From the WSJ.

Why America’s Gun Laws Are in Chaos
Judges clash over history a year after Supreme Court upended how courts decide Second Amendment cases—‘the whole thing puzzles me’

By Jacob Gershman
Aug. 1, 2023 5:30 am ET

The Supreme Court last summer sought to clarify its expansive reading of the Second Amendment. Instead, it set off chaos.

The decision in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen decreed that gun-control laws of today must have a clear forerunner in weapons regulations around the time of the nation’s infancy, regardless of the modern public-safety rationale behind them.

The result: Hundreds of gun cases litigated in recent months have become a free-for-all, with lower courts conflicted or confounded about how and where to draw limits on gun rights.

“There’s all this picking and choosing of historical evidence. ‘This is too early. This is too late. Too small, too big,’” Judge Gerard Lynch of the Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said during a recent argument about a new law in New York that prohibits guns in sensitive places like parks, museums and bars. “The whole thing puzzles me.”

In that case, the right of licensed handgun owners to carry weapons into bars and theaters could hinge on 19th-century statutes that barred drunks from carrying firearms, and outlawed guns and butcher knives in social parties attended by ladies. A case decided last fall held that the federal ban on guns with obliterated serial numbers was unconstitutional because unmarked guns were perfectly legal in the 18th century.

The Bruen case launched the upheaval. In that decision, the Supreme Court said New York couldn’t require concealed-carry applicants to prove a dire need for self-protection. The 6-3 opinion, written by Justice Clarence Thomas and endorsed by five fellow conservatives, said the restrictive licensing rules violated the Second Amendment right of ordinary, law-abiding citizens to carry handguns for self-defense.

The opinion rejected the practice of lower courts considering the public-safety intentions of gun laws being challenged. The courts often found that the government’s goal of curbing gun crimes and mass shootings outweighed the liberty interests of gun owners.

Story continues at https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-the...hare_permalink

[father-of-five]

It's kind of ironic that they broad brush the carry laws in about a dozen states into "America's gun laws."

[Ilikebuckets]

Because people want to ignore the Constitution and the concept of natural rights. Simple as that. Once you deviate from the 2nd, chaos ensues.

[jthrelf]

Good. Getting back slowly to the intended framework.

[GunLawyer001]

I imagine that there was some economic and legal upheaval after slavery was banned, too.

Nobody who thinks that guns can be banned in public parks because they are "sensitive places" in some unspecified way, needs to go back and take some basic logic courses. Having guns outdoors has a bit of a tradition in this country, and "gun-free zones" are slaughterhouses, so no sane person can argue that they save lives, when almost every spree shooting has been in one.

[ImminentDanger]

Many judges are first and foremost, liberal leftists.

It is important to ALWAYS remember that liberal leftists are ALL ABOUT POWER & CONTROL. It is at the core of almost every action they promote. Whatever subject they choose to be involved with, it is a FACADE, with the underlying goal of power & control. Their insatiable desire is kept behind the facade.

This is why so many of their promoted ideas are illogical, wacky & chaotic. But even justifications that can be seen with some rationality are still facades. They don't actually believe in these causes - they are a means to an end - power & control. They will change their reasons & rationales in any way, and even lie, to maintain the importance of their perspective. They will say and do what is necessary to maintain the facade of caring about people, when the underlying truth is their quest for power & control.

Gun Control is just such an issue. The Fantastical Claim of Peace & Safety from individual disarmament is debunked every time there is a mugging, assault or murder. The victims feel no Peace & Safety. And the only Peace & Safety that the public enjoys is that which is manufactured in their heads when they keep their heads buried in the sand of liberal leftist idealogy.

We have gotten to so much accepted Gun Control because the past Supreme Court rulings did not protect The People's Rights from the overreaching governmental assertion of authority. Even most recently, the USSC did not protect The People from the government's Coronavirus PANIC response. It was all about Power & Control, first & foremost. The Rights of The People must be yielded to the government's goals.

CHAOS?
Only because for so long court opinions were NOT BASED ON THE CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITATION OF THE GOVERNMENT - but rather the opinions were issued to produce the desired outcomes preferred by liberal leftists.

We have yet to see if the present USSC will press forward with restoring the CONSTITUTION (as voted upon by The People) to the position of the Law of the Land, or whether, under pressure, they withdraw from their originalist embrace to issue preferred outcomes. Will they continue the tradition of initiating their own (self-righteous) silent amendments to the Constitution (with no votes from The People)?

The Fantasy of Peace & Safety
Constitutional Open Carry

...

[Walleye Hunter]

Gun laws and America are in chaos because a certain faction of our citizenry is opposed to holding people accountable for their actions. If that problem would get corrected, the rest would all fall into place.

[bigandy1966]

"The result: Hundreds of gun cases litigated in recent months have become a free-for-all, with lower courts conflicted or confounded about how and where to draw limits on gun rights."


All you need to know about the author and their political leanings


"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

[buckengr]

"The result: Hundreds of gun cases litigated in recent months have become a free-for-all, with lower courts conflicted or confounded about how and where to draw limits on gun rights."


All you need to know about the author and their political leanings


"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Exactly.

Infringe: "to act so as to LIMIT or undermine something; encroach on something"

Shall not infringe = no limits

It's all just evil tyrants feigning confusion because they don't like the obvious meaning of the second amendment and would rather have the ability to lock you in a cage because they hate you, your thoughts, your speech, and your freedom.

Think about that whenever you hear a gun controller/progressive talk and lecture.