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:

In Heller, the Court found that a handgun ban in D.C. violated an individual right to keep and bear arms under the Second Amendment. Two years later, the court expanded this rule nationwide by striking down a similar handgun ban in Chicago. Last year in its Bruen decision, the court concluded that concealed carry permits for guns could not be premised on a proper need requirement. What’s the common thread? This court is extremely protective of an individual’s possession of firearms.

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.

What can gun reform advocates do with that? We can pass laws to close gun stores in the 17 states where Democrats have unified control. As a candidate for the state Assembly in New York — one of those 17 states — I am proposing a law telling every corporate entity in the state to make a choice: either stop selling guns or stop doing business in our state.

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.

Spread the love

By awa

8 thoughts on ““Stupid Is As Stupid Does,” The Hill”
  1. Sigh.
    Once again with feeling: 1984 was intended as a cautionary tale, not an instruction manual.

  2. Firearms are the ONLY tool that gets blamed for crime. Its the only tool We the People have to defend our freedoms.. I have heard rumors that ny state outside of the city is chock full of firearms….. rumors…

  3. and should he win, firearm/ammo companies should stop selling to any authorities in his district. Just like he wants.

  4. Yet another “circumvent the Constitution and disarm the. citizens with this one weird old trick”
    This reminds me of the pretentious twit on Tumblr proposing gun control by restricting sales of potassium nitrate, referred to as KNO3 to sound more sciency. Said poster was promptly ripped apart since there are lots of non gun uses and saltpeter is only used in black powder. An even bigger idiot once proposed making all ammunition new non-standard calibers like .23, or 9.1mm.

    1. An even bigger idiot once proposed making all ammunition new non-standard calibers like .23, or 9.1mm.
      Re-label all existing stock and slap a sticker on it that says it MAY be able to be cycle through older guns, check with your manufacturer or gunsmith. Done.
      There’s a fair amount of play and historical marketing in the ammunition markets anyway. A .38-caliber slug has the exact same diameter as a .357-caliber one. IIRC, they “rounded up” because a .38 sounds bigger than .357, and people might be more willing to buy the weaker round if it has a larger number.
      .223/5.56mm has the same diameter as .22 (a fact that makes us all chuckle when anti-gun pols talk about restricting ammunition “greater than .22 caliber”).
      .45 Long Colt, .45GAP, .45ACP, .44 Magnum, .44 Special, and .410 shot shells all have the same diameter.
      And don’t get me started on the WIDE variety of .30-caliber chamberings, with a lot of different numbers out front.
      I see what that idiot is trying to do, but getting around it is absurdly simple.

  5. The guy that wrote the article is Scott Budow, a democrat. I expect no less than moronic ideas from any democrat.

  6. So I would not be violating the First Amendment by saying that you can have free SPEECH and of the Press, but I can now require all paper to have a stamp affixed to it, to ensure that it’s tax was paid. Where have I heard that idea before?

Comments are closed.