[quote=Anonymous]

I’m aware of what was decided in Heller. I don’t think taking away a right for 30 days is acceptable.

This is not the way to deal with gun violence. [/quote]

You haven't given a coherent answer as to what you think the RIGHT way to deal with gun violence is. And as someone siding with gun proponents it's on you to answer that question since you're part of the community producing gun violence. [/quote]

So much misinformation.

The governor is not taking away guns. The governor is taking away open carry and concealed carry, in one county, for 30 days.

Open Carry (and concealed carry) is entirely a matter of state law, not the US Constitution. For instance, Florida bans open carry, even to this day. And up until July of this year, you needed a permit for concealed carry. No 2A violations before or after July 1 were involved.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:The US Constitution does not provide a right to open carry weapons. So, I have no idea what Hogg and Lieu think they are talking about. It will be up to New Mexico's Supreme Court to determine whether this move is allowed under the state's constitution or not.

The U.S. Constitution doesn't provide any rights. Rights are granted by God (or by nature if that makes you nervous). The point is, the U.S. Constitution is a negative check on government power. Furthermore, since rights are NOT granted by man, they cannot be taken away by man.

Carry on... literally.

There is no evidence god. There is conclusive evidence of the constitution. So, fail.

This is what happens when republicans start pushing a national gun registry and anyone on the list can be threaten with jail. Look at Hunter Biden.

Anonymous wrote:You keep citing the Constitution. It also guarantees the right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.

Yet those rights keep being taken away because of unfettered gun violence.

Why are those constitutional rights supposed to take a back seat to 2A?

How can that be justified? The Constitution makes no provision for 2A reigning supreme over all other clauses.

Because you keep turning the bad apples out of jail with soft-on-crime DA's as some sort of idiotic social justice/restorative justice statement.

You also push idiotic laws like theft under $1000 will not be prosecuted and letting violent criminals go with a warning after just a few hours.

That's YOUR fault. Stop the nonsense and the violence will stop.

Anonymous wrote:You keep citing the Constitution. It also guarantees the right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.

Yet those rights keep being taken away because of unfettered gun violence.

Why are those constitutional rights supposed to take a back seat to 2A?

How can that be justified? The Constitution makes no provision for 2A reigning supreme over all other clauses.

The Constitution does not guarantee the right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. That phrase is from the Declaration of Independence, where it is stated that the Creator has endowed all men with inalienable rights including those. The Constitution's Bill of Rights for all citizens that the federal government may not infringe is where 2A is found.

You keep citing the Constitution. It also guarantees the right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.

Yet those rights keep being taken away because of unfettered gun violence.

Why are those constitutional rights supposed to take a back seat to 2A?

How can that be justified? The Constitution makes no provision for 2A reigning supreme over all other clauses.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elections are coming up, time to test the emergency orders again. Make everyone mask up, take away law abiding citizens rights.

Is it going to work again this time?

Your freedom to swing your fists ends at someone else's nose.

Your freedoms end at the point where they put someone else at risk. When your freedoms end up taking away someone else's freedom (and especially, when your freedoms take away someone's greatest and most important freedom - their life) that is when controls need to come in.

The Governor took an oath to uphold the state constitution, not just the parts she likes but all of it. She is no longer doing so, and should be impeached.

If you don’t like the constitution then go through the process to change it. If the government is not going to arrest criminals, prosecute them, and if convicted lock them away, then citizens have no choice but to act to protect themselves.

The right wing's push to arm more citizens has been an abject failure and has only caused gun crimes and gun violence to increase.

I’m aware of what was decided in Heller. I don’t think taking away a right for 30 days is acceptable.

This is not the way to deal with gun violence. [/quote]

You haven't given a coherent answer as to what you think the RIGHT way to deal with gun violence is. And as someone siding with gun proponents it's on you to answer that question since you're part of the community producing gun violence.

[quote=Anonymous]
Heller deemed it to be a [b]limited[/b] right. As did many other laws (such as NFA) and other court precedents.

And meanwhile NOTHING the right and gun proponents have ever done has ever helped to curb gun violence. Everything they have done has only made the problem of gun violence worse. [/quote]

I’m aware of what was decided in Heller. I don’t think taking away a right for 30 days is acceptable.

This is not the way to deal with gun violence.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elections are coming up, time to test the emergency orders again. Make everyone mask up, take away law abiding citizens rights.

Is it going to work again this time?

Your freedom to swing your fists ends at someone else's nose.

Your freedoms end at the point where they put someone else at risk. When your freedoms end up taking away someone else's freedom (and especially, when your freedoms take away someone's greatest and most important freedom - their life) that is when controls need to come in.

The Governor took an oath to uphold the state constitution, not just the parts she likes but all of it. She is no longer doing so, and should be impeached.

If you don’t like the constitution then go through the process to change it. If the government is not going to arrest criminals, prosecute them, and if convicted lock them away, then citizens have no choice but to act to protect themselves.

The Sheriffs took oaths to protect and serve yet gun violence has surged. So they are no longer protecting and serving, and should be impeached.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elections are coming up, time to test the emergency orders again. Make everyone mask up, take away law abiding citizens rights.

Is it going to work again this time?

Your freedom to swing your fists ends at someone else's nose.

Your freedoms end at the point where they put someone else at risk. When your freedoms end up taking away someone else's freedom (and especially, when your freedoms take away someone's greatest and most important freedom - their life) that is when controls need to come in.

One person swings their fist. The other doesn't.

Cut both their hands off?

Per the person responding above about what the Republican proposal is to end gun violence,

"Put the boots on the neck of those communities that are producing the most violence."

So that means gun owners. Maybe having a boot on your neck, having a broader crackdown, will make you think about how we should have more responsible policies about guns.

Like, why it is so easy for people with a history of mental illness, domestic violence, anger management issues to get a gun in the first place - or why we don't have a searchable database to help track down and close off the pipelines by which many criminals get their guns (straw buyers and gunrunners).

People like you keep saying things like "the black community should find a way to solve the issue of violence of blacks on blacks" so why shouldn't the same logic apply, and the community of gun owners have pressure put on them and be held responsible to solve the issue of ending the rampant gun violence?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elections are coming up, time to test the emergency orders again. Make everyone mask up, take away law abiding citizens rights.

Is it going to work again this time?

Your freedom to swing your fists ends at someone else's nose.

Your freedoms end at the point where they put someone else at risk. When your freedoms end up taking away someone else's freedom (and especially, when your freedoms take away someone's greatest and most important freedom - their life) that is when controls need to come in.

The Governor took an oath to uphold the state constitution, not just the parts she likes but all of it. She is no longer doing so, and should be impeached.

If you don’t like the constitution then go through the process to change it. If the government is not going to arrest criminals, prosecute them, and if convicted lock them away, then citizens have no choice but to act to protect themselves.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elections are coming up, time to test the emergency orders again. Make everyone mask up, take away law abiding citizens rights.

Is it going to work again this time?

Your freedom to swing your fists ends at someone else's nose.

Your freedoms end at the point where they put someone else at risk. When your freedoms end up taking away someone else's freedom (and especially, when your freedoms take away someone's greatest and most important freedom - their life) that is when controls need to come in.

One person swings their fist. The other doesn't.

Cut both their hands off?

Anonymous wrote:Democrats aren't even circumspect about it.

They'll steal by any and every means.

A classroom full of children shot to pieces by a lunatic who had unfettered access to an AR-15
Gun nut response: "hey you need to be circumspect!"

We wouldn't be in this situation at all if YOU were circumspect.

Anonymous wrote:Elections are coming up, time to test the emergency orders again. Make everyone mask up, take away law abiding citizens rights.

Is it going to work again this time?

Your freedom to swing your fists ends at someone else's nose.

Your freedoms end at the point where they put someone else at risk. When your freedoms end up taking away someone else's freedom (and especially, when your freedoms take away someone's greatest and most important freedom - their life) that is when controls need to come in.