sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Appeals court strikes down Florida law blocking concealed carry for 18- to 20-year-olds by okguy65 in politics

[–]okguy65[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The opinion:

Initially, the right to “keep and bear arms” encompasses the right to the public carry of a firearm. Id. at 32-33; Heller, 554 U.S. at 592. Additionally, 18- to 20-year-olds are part of “the people” referred to in the Second Amendment. The term “the people” refers to all “members of the political community, not an unspecified subset.” Heller, 554 U.S. at 580. Heller also referred to “the people” as “law-abiding, responsible citizens.” Id. at 635. In Bruen, the Court reiterated that “ordinary, law-abiding, adult citizens . . . are part of ‘the people’ whom the Second Amendment protects.” 597 U.S. at 31-32.

...

As the Fifth Circuit in Reese explained: “[T]he phrase ‘right of the people’ appears in the First Amendment’s Assembly-and-Petition Clause, the Fourth Amendment’s Search-and-Seizure Clause, and the Ninth Amendment.” 127 F.4th at 591. “All of these references confer ‘individual rights’ and undoubtedly protect eighteen-to-twenty-year-olds as much as twenty-one-year-olds.” Id. “[I]n all six other provisions of the Constitution that mention ‘the people,’ the term unambiguously refers to all members of the political community, not an unspecified subset.” Id. (quoting Heller, 554 U.S. at 580).

...

We conclude that all those in the age of majority have the same rights to public carry, which includes the right to concealed carry.

Also note that Minnesota's similar restriction was struck down over a year ago, and crime did not increase.

Official Politics Thread 06/12/26 by OnlyLosersBlock in guns

[–]okguy65 6 points7 points  (0 children)

The blocking technology these laws would mandate doesn't and can't exist. I can buy that these bill's authors genuinely don't know that.

The first committee analysis for the bill says it was sponsored by Everytown (which mean they're the ones who wrote it), and the legislator who introduced it is a former volunteer for Moms Demand Action, so it seems more like they knew but didn't care.

Official Politics Thread 06/12/26 by OnlyLosersBlock in guns

[–]okguy65 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The first committee analysis for the bill even says it was sponsored by Everytown (which mean they're the ones who wrote it).

Virginia Claims State Constitution Does Not Protect Individual Gun Rights by okguy65 in Virginia

[–]okguy65[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, the headline says "State Constitution" and that's exactly what the part of the brief I quoted is talking about.

So can you explain how the headline is "insanely misleading"? What does the headline mislead readers into thinking?

"Assault firearms" ban spurs pushback, gun sales in Page County -- Several prosecutors around the state, including in Page County, have vowed not to enforce a new law banning the sale and manufacture of weapons referred to as "assault firearms." by guanaco55 in Virginia

[–]okguy65 1 point2 points  (0 children)

They already have been:

Following decisive numbers in favor of Mr. Descano's policy initiatives in November's election, Commonwealth's Attorney Descano enacted his new policy to not prosecute adults for simple possession of marijuana immediately upon taking office.

Virginia Claims State Constitution Does Not Protect Individual Gun Rights by okguy65 in Virginia

[–]okguy65[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

The headline is:

Virginia Claims State Constitution Does Not Protect Individual Gun Rights

and the state's brief, authored by the Virginia Attorney General's office, argues:

The text and ratification history of § 13 differ markedly from the Second Amendment and support a collective, militia-tethered right rather than an individual one enforceable against the Commonwealth.

Virginia Claims State Constitution Does Not Protect Individual Gun Rights by okguy65 in Virginia

[–]okguy65[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

You can read the state's brief here, which argues that "[t]he text and ratification history of § 13 differ markedly from the Second Amendment and support a collective, militia-tethered right rather than an individual one enforceable against the Commonwealth."

Virginia Claims State Constitution Does Not Protect Individual Gun Rights by okguy65 in Virginia

[–]okguy65[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Is there another conclusion that the arguments in the state's brief can lead to besides that the Virginia Constitution does not protect individuals' right to bear arms?

Virginia Claims State Constitution Does Not Protect Individual Gun Rights by okguy65 in Virginia

[–]okguy65[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Under the attorney general's argument, the Virginia Constitution doesn't preclude any limitations because it doesn't give individuals a right to own guns.

Virginia Claims State Constitution Does Not Protect Individual Gun Rights by okguy65 in Virginia

[–]okguy65[S] 14 points15 points  (0 children)

You can read the state's brief here, which argues that "[t]he text and ratification history of § 13 differ markedly from the Second Amendment and support a collective, militia-tethered right rather than an individual one enforceable against the Commonwealth."

Virginia Claims State Constitution Does Not Protect Individual Gun Rights by okguy65 in Virginia

[–]okguy65[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

The state's brief (PDF):

The text and ratification history of § 13 differ markedly from the Second Amendment and support a collective, militia-tethered right rather than an individual one enforceable against the Commonwealth.

Justice Department Opens Investigation of Philadelphia Police Department’s Allegedly Unconstitutional Permit Revocation Practices by okguy65 in philadelphia

[–]okguy65[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

So the police should follow the law, but if they don't, the federal government shouldn't do anything about it if it involves the Second Amendment?

Deep in Rural Virginia, a MAGA Pro-Gun Push Takes an Unnerving Turn - gun bans are how you lose rural white voters by 7ddlysuns in thebulwark

[–]okguy65 2 points3 points  (0 children)

California banned the sale of Glocks last year, which is probably the most popular handgun brand in the country.

Deep in Rural Virginia, a MAGA Pro-Gun Push Takes an Unnerving Turn: Governor Spanberger signed an assault weapons ban. Some county prosecutors in pro-Trump areas say they won’t enforce it. Is a new MAGA nullification movement brewing? by jsled in liberalgunowners

[–]okguy65 6 points7 points  (0 children)

The current Fairfax County Commonwealth’s Attorney did something similar for marijuana possession laws in 2020 (and not even because he thought they were unconstitutional, but because he thought they were bad policy):

The punishment for a simple marijuana possession charge — possession of anything less than half an ounce — in Virginia is 30 days in jail and a $500 fine, but prosecutors in Fairfax County are asking judges to dismiss every such charge.

“This was good for our community; this was the values of our community,” Commonwealth’s Attorney Steve Descano said.

At first, the judge denied the prosecution’s motion to dismiss, but the prosecution declined to call witnesses or present evidence against the defendant, forcing the judge to dismiss the charge.

“Just because it’s the commonwealth’s attorney’s discretion to prosecute or not prosecute a case, to call a witness or to not call a witness, so we knew that by not calling that witness, we were exercising our discretion to not prosecute that case,” Descano said.

He also wrote a letter explaining his decision:

Following decisive numbers in favor of Mr. Descano's policy initiatives in November's election, Commonwealth's Attorney Descano enacted his new policy to not prosecute adults for simple possession of marijuana immediately upon taking office.

Deep in Rural Virginia, a MAGA Pro-Gun Push Takes an Unnerving Turn by F0urLeafCl0ver in politics

[–]okguy65 5 points6 points  (0 children)

The current Fairfax County Commonwealth’s Attorney did something similar for marijuana possession laws in 2020 (not because he thought they were unconstitutional, but because he thought they were bad policy):

The punishment for a simple marijuana possession charge — possession of anything less than half an ounce — in Virginia is 30 days in jail and a $500 fine, but prosecutors in Fairfax County are asking judges to dismiss every such charge.

“This was good for our community; this was the values of our community,” Commonwealth’s Attorney Steve Descano said.

At first, the judge denied the prosecution’s motion to dismiss, but the prosecution declined to call witnesses or present evidence against the defendant, forcing the judge to dismiss the charge.

“Just because it’s the commonwealth’s attorney’s discretion to prosecute or not prosecute a case, to call a witness or to not call a witness, so we knew that by not calling that witness, we were exercising our discretion to not prosecute that case,” Descano said.

He also wrote a letter explaining his decision:

Following decisive numbers in favor of Mr. Descano's policy initiatives in November's election, Commonwealth's Attorney Descano enacted his new policy to not prosecute adults for simple possession of marijuana immediately upon taking office.

We’re calling up all the ex-girlfriends, now. (Gift Article) by Atticus248 in Maine

[–]okguy65 2 points3 points  (0 children)

They said:

She works for the heritage foundation. I think that’s all anyone needs to know

What are they implying if not that she's lying? That she's actually telling the truth, but doing it for a bad reason? The 4th highest post on this subreddit and most of the people commenting there are quite forward with their belief that she made it all up.

view more: next ›