I can only present the facts. At the end of the day, there are those who claim they are for the Second Amendment and yet they support gun control in one form or another.Why is it that people like to ask questions as if they are capable of having a nuanced discussion or are actually seeking a broader perspective, when all they want are their biases confirmed?
Why not just ask Q what you should think and be done with any sort of conversation?
Meanwhile, the courts are doing exactly what Thomas Jefferson said government would do: they gain ground while the people yield. If you are for some form of gun control, you should be apprised of the facts. I'm not telling you to be for or against gun control. I can only tell you how the government got to their rationale for imposing unconstitutional gun control measures. If you are going to yield, you have a duty and a responsibility to know how the government reached its conclusions. That way, you begin to know the ultimate costs. I wouldn't know a lot about Q. What I can tell you is how the government (specifically the courts) arrived at the conclusion that they had some power (as differentiated from authority) to infringe on gun Rights.
I'm moving toward Liberty; you are moving toward tyranny. Please reread posts # 84, #87, and # 96 so that we don't keep repeating the civics lesson. IF you read that, we can then talk about inalienable rights. No point in talking about the topic if you're going to ignore what the courts have ruled.