The unconstitutional gun control law I do not agree with is the Firearm Owner’s Protection Act of 1986 aka "Restricting machine gun ownership for law abiding citizens law". I believe that this gun control law can be defeated through our court system. I am surprised to know that the NRA has not done anything to overturn it. I am surprised to know that it was a private citizen from the Cato Institute, Mr. Levy, who stood up in court and defeated the unreasonable gun control laws of Washington D.C.
I have told God that if I become rich within my lifetime, I will fight this unconstitutional law in court, hire the best of the best attorneys, and overturn it by legal means. Criminals do not obey the law and they own machine guns, this law makes it very hard and extremely expensive for good law abiding citizens to own a fully automatic firearm. I want every citizen to be able to fully exercise his rights and to have the choice to own the same firearms that our military has. If God blesses me with more wealth and I take this to court? Who do you think will win?
Related posts:
- 1.The Brady Bill is related to gun control, and the Wanger Act is related to?
- is The US Copying Nazi Gun Control?
- What gun control laws did Great Britain have when the American colonies revolted?
- Firearm Control, how is it a good thing?
- Do you believe in strict gun control laws?
- Gun control would have stopped Columbine?
- Has anyone seen the status of the HR45 Blair Holt firearm licensing and sales act of 2009?
- Which case: New York v US or Printz v US will the Con controlled Supreme Court cite to strike down Obamacare?
- Canadian Gun control Survey for my project(please answer asap)?
- Why Support Gun Control Knowing The Results?
Depends on the dominant party affiliation of the Supreme Court Judges. I’ll keep personal politics out of this answer and keep it simple, in the fact that, if a conservative/Republican majority is in the Supreme Court, you would likely win your case, assuming it’s presented in the best way possible. If it were a liberal/Democrat majority, you would likely lose.
In simple terms, that’s likely going to be the outcome, because, regardless of what case you present, gun control, especially guns of that nature, are largely a matter of personal belief/agenda, and for whatever reason, minds are made up one way or another regardless of what will be stated. In the end, the Supreme Court justices are people, and as unbiased as people try to be, personal mentalities and attitudes always play a role.
First, you’d have to be able to show how you’ve been harmed by this law in order for your case to be accepted. Keep in mind, as well, that even if you hit the Mega Millions lottery jackpot or otherwise strike it rich, there are evil people who will use their resources against you. The name George Soros comes to mind.
We’d all be better served by working to elect some hard-core pro-gunners to all levels of government.
If I become rich, I have told god that I would help the sick and poor…not to help everyone buy machine guns….
There are two angles in pushing for the 2d Am: self defense and tyranny deterrent. Hunting is a distant third. The need for fully automatic weapons for self defense, however, is probably a hard sell, even among gun enthusiasts. That leaves the tyranny deterrent argument, which is probably the most applicable argument given the 2d Am’s history. From a political standpoint, however, the tyranny argument is disturbing. Most folks don’t want to talk about revolutions or uprisings. These days we call such people insurgents or terrorists.
The bottom line is that I think you will lose. Don’t get me wrong because I agree with your strict legal analysis. But even the courts are influenced by politics and societal influences, especially at the highest appellate courts where policy can decide cases.
By the time you become rich, there will be better fights.
If Obama manages to pack the court even semi-autos,
in civilian hands and ‘right to carry laws will be in jeopardy.
Wow, what a coincidence. Just the other day God was telling me that his #1 priority was to get you a machine gun.
* You are correct and yes it is Unconstitutional along with many other Gun Laws that were created to Infringe on your 2nd Amendment Rights.* It says; " The Right to Keep and Bear Arms Shall Not Be Infringed."… Why is it now needed or necessary to pass another Law or any Law on Gun Ownership and your Right to choose whatever Arms you desire to Use,Own and Possess. The Point is its not needed or necessary.* What is needed or necessary is for the Federal, State, County, and Local Governments to finally live up to the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that was written for us by Our Founding Fathers and Stop Violating our Constitutional Rights once and for all.* Save your $$$$, you don’t need to spend it on reestablishing or recreating, or Defending what the true meaning, intent, and purpose of the 2nd Amendment is, was, or always will be.*.However the day may come when you may have to Bear Arms in order for it to be Honored, Respected, and Lived up to once and for all.*… Any True Patriot will do whatever is necessary to Protect and Defend Our Constitutional Rights against Anyone, Anywhere, at Anytime when it finally becomes necessary and unavoidable because of a Tyrant, Tyrannical Governments, and all Enemy’s Foreign or Domestic inside or outside of our Governments whether its Federal, State, County, or Local.**. Only a Criminal, Tyrant, or a Tyrannical Government is Afraid of the Armed American Citizen.* Try Living Free in America without Your Guns and Your Ammo; I Dare You.*… " Live Free or Die."
It’s because most Americans are stupid, just look who we elect to run our Country. We would have dumbass parents high on persciption drugs sending there kids to school with a loaded AK, for show and tell. personally i’d rather have a .50 BMG.
Just go to court and overturn the gun control laws. I personally think that things like artillery is a bit much, for obvious reasons, and that there’s nothing wrong with a waiting period (you still get your gun), but by all means, if you can afford an attorney now, go for it. For the gun licenses, bring up the old poll tax used to prevent black people from voting in the 19th century. I’m pretty sure that argument could also be used to allow people to have automatics.
By the way, didn’t mean to necro, but it’s a pretty important issue for me.