Constitutional justification for gun control?

Question

What is the Constitutional justification for gun control? Does it have to do with the in order to maintain a well-ordered militia stipulation, or is it something to do with the Commerce Clause? Under the Commerce Clause, are they allowed to restrict the ownership of an item whose purchase is illegal? How is ownership proof of purchase, and how do they require gun registration?

The commerce clause has long since been extended to include commerce within the individual states... something I don't agree with but which is true and not something they used only to institute gun control

Answer 1

There is no justification other than public opinion.

Answer 2

First, remember that the 2nd Amendment only protects against federal gun control. It was never incorporated against the states, so it has no effect on state regulation of firearms.

The relevant Amendment is the 10th, which gives the states the right to do just about anything they way, unless it is specifically prohibited to them by the Constitution. So, since the 2nd does not limit the states, the states are free to set whatever laws they want subject only to their own state constitutions.

The exception, as you pointed out, is where Congress has some other authority and can enact federal laws that preempt the states. But the specific language of the 2nd Amendment trumps the broad language of the Commerce Clause, so that even though buying and selling guns may be commercial activity, the 2nd Amendment protections still apply against federal regulation.

Answer 3

The 2nd Amendment states that the Right of The People to keep and bear arms (weapons) shall not be infringed (interfered with). This is to defend themsleves, their communities, their nation and to enforce their sovereignty. A Militia is called up from among the people and The People are expected to answer that call with their own combat arms, well trained in their use.

The litmus test regarding 'arms' was applied in the Miller case as well as others. The Supreme Court stated that if a firearm can be shown to have combat usefulness, then the Federal government cannot interfere with a man's right to own it IN ANY WAY, not with length restrictions, licensing fees, etc.

The Federal Government has snuck Gun Control into America through the Commerce Clause. However, a rational look at that would indicate that if guns are sold in the same State in which they are produced, the Commerce Clause cannot apply.

Once the precedent was set and Americans were conditioned to accept some form of restriction, the restrictions escalated well beyond the realm of the Commerce Clause.

A State cannot impose laws that violate the Bill of Rights. Therefore, States cannot restrict combat-suitable firearms either.

The plan of Leftist disarmament groups like the Brady group (that changes its name occasionally) is to progressively impose more and more regulations and restrictions until a law-abiding Citizen cannot own or bear arms. This is standard M.O. for Leftists seeking tyrannical rule. They disarm their publics so they have power to control them. Chairman Mao of Red China, Adolf Hitler (Socialist Workers Party of Germany), Stalin, all did the same thing. In their world, absolute power is in the hands of Government Elites and Guns are the enforcers of absolute power.

The Leftist ideology is in direct conflict with American ideology. In America, The People are Sovereign, the highest authority, and therefore The People have an inalienable right to Bear Arms to enforce their mastery over their public servants. That is the ultimate purpose of the 2nd Amendment.

It is not about hunting ducks and bunnies or 'sporting purposes' as the lying Leftists insist.

The Right to Keep and Bear Arms applies to all armaments carried by the individual soldier including the current norm in combat firearms, high-capacity magazines, blades and other individual tools of combat.

It is especially important if one lives in an urban environment where riots may occur. The real hero of the Los Angeles Riots was the Korean shopkeeper with his AK-47, defending his and his neighbors' shops, with his buddies reloading magazines for him, against a gun-wielding criminal mob trying to kill him. That man demonstrated what it is to be an American.

Within the context of this question, the 'Brady' waiting period, bans on sales of various combat firearms to the general public, restrictions on manufacture of magazines of normal (or extended) capacity, limitations on the length of various firearms... all Federal actions related to restricting or regulating individual ownership of combat firearms are prohibited by the Constitution.

Answer 4

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"... technically they can't do all that registration stuff... but it does make sense. I don't have one, but you can bet when we stop bouncing all around the world (hey, I like bouncing) I will get one and take one of those classes so I don't screw up with it.