The Hill starts by telling use that the Rahimi case is about “red flag” laws. It isn’t. Of all the dumb takes that they could make, this is likely the dumbest. It does have a strong emotional punch, though.
They attempt to blame “skyrocketing” gun deaths on the opinions of the Supreme Court. How dare the highest court in the land uphold the law of the land?
So the Hill proposes a solution. The states should outlaw (restrict) the sale of guns.
They explain the meaning of the three Second Amendment cases they actually know about:
How about, the court is extremely protective of the law, of the Constitution? The right they are protecting is the Right of The People to Keep and Bear Arms.
But you see, there is a loophole. “Keeping and bearing” arms is not the same as a right to buy or sell arms. Isn’t they smart! When people told their parents that brothers shouldn’t marry sisters, they didn’t expect smarts like The Hill got from that union.
Those entities that refuse to comply would be subject to dissolution or an injunction preventing further business activity in New York. This would essentially close stores that sell guns in our state, since virtually all such stores are corporate entities. That would not eliminate gun violence, but it would help to stem the tide by making it harder to get a gun.
This idiot then suggests that people who want to buy guns just drive over the boarder and buy them in a red state. This person is advocating a felony. You can’t buy a handgun in a different state. Well, you can, but it has to be shipped to a local FFL.
When his uncle and aunt married each other event then, the best part of him ran down his mother’s leg. He seems to think that the —Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 US 393 (Supreme Court 1857) should still be good law. Because of “precedent”.
Regardless, I wish Scott Budow, Democratic candidate for New York State Assembly, District 52 all the respect he deserves.