National NRA sues Florida over gun bill same day Gov. Scott signed it into law

[Ura-Ki]

I prefer not to share those thoughts with the general public!

 

[ma96782]

I took notice that certain individuals (due to their employment) are exempt. But, everyone else must be denied their right. Hummm.......IMHO, that just doesn't sound like "equal treatment."

Would the Liberals be so gung ho if voting rights were also subject to such an employment test?

Aloha, Mark

 

[Member 3687]

To me this is not a Second amendment or an age discrimination issue but a constitution in general issue.

At 18 you are considered and adult buy law (younger in some states) to enter into contracts, own a business, buy a house, punishment for crimes, vote and they are able to do any other legal endeavors all adults can do unless deemed unfit buy the courts for crimes or mental issues.

So if this person is not protected by the Second amendment then are they protected by any other amendment of the constitution, if not then we are all screwed.

Looking at the state of Florida there is an estimated 1 million 18, 19 and 20 year olds who have just lost their right to buy a gun. Not buy the courts for crimes committed or mental issues but a politician.

That means you can get a hunting license but you cannot buy a gun, you can become a security officer and maybe even law enforcement but you cannot buy a gun.

Now I do not know if they have said they cannot own one or just not buy one but if you cannot buy one it is hard to own one unless you receive one as a gift, private sale or straw purchase all defeating the background check for the new owner between 18 and 20.

From what I understand the Supreme court has basically stated it is an individual right to own a gun for home protection and if I understand what I have read the reason you can get away with the 21 age limit for handguns is because you could still buy a rifle at 18 and a rifle is still affording you personal protection.

If this case fails then what is next do you have to be 40 to have free speech, 70 for freedom of religion.


Amendment 10 - Undelegated Powers Kept by the States and the People

The Tenth Amendment:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution nor prohibited by states, are reserved to the states respectively or to the people.

So if I understand this right the tenth amendment means that anything the Constitution does not mention can be considered by states as part of their powers if they wish to do so.

Is not the Second amendment mentioned in the constitution so it takes the rights of the state away?

I have been pissed at the NRA for a while but I am happy to see them doing something about this so much so I renewed my membership for another 3 years.

So we will see what happens…


EDIT I found copies of the law suit and the law and I see they have already talked about the same stuff I did.

Sorry for repeating the info

 

[Caveman Jim]

Time for the NRA to spend some of our money on something we agree on...

 

[nwslopoke]

Many parents know the schools want to grant children "protection" from you as early as 13 in some cases. By 16 the schools will tell you, it's none of your business what your child is telling us.

Now the same people who think the young mind isn't ready until 21 are the same idiots that say 7 yo Johnny can chose what ever gender he has made a thoughtful decision on because...his brain is developed. Which is it?

 

[jackrv]

In fact, the 2nd Amendment gives us the right to own military-grade rifles for the very purpose of being able to use them as a member of the militia from the age of 18!! Every 18-year-old should probably be required to own a select-fire M4. But now I'm just dreaming...

The 2nd doesn't give us any right, it GUARANTEES the right of the people to own and bear arms.

 

[CHLChris]

Yes, you are right. Please forgive me for my rhetoric. I'll select my words more carefully next time. Thank you for missing the point of my post.

 

[Ura-Ki]

Lets expand a bit bere, the State of Illinois has just about passed full confiscation of firearms legally purchased before the age of 21! Not only are you forbidden from purchasing ANY firearms, you are now going to be required to surrender any firearm you own, no grandfathering, no transfer to an "Adult" or any other work around! No provision is made for your firearms to be returned to you when you reach the age of 21, and no provision is made to pay you for your weapon!
So, not only are you fully and completey denied your guaranteed Constitutional right, you are discriminated against by age and by definition of adulthood! The State has basically just changed all other laws regarding age, making 21 the lawful required age to do any thing!
Tell me other States won't jump all over this if it passes with Kali leading the charge, and OryGun right behind!

 

[etrain16]

Time for the NRA to spend some of our money on something we agree on...

The nice thing is that this case can set a precedent in all the other states if it is found to be discrimination. This is the kind of case the NRA should be on - same as the one in Illinois. I'm glad to see them jump on this.

 

[etrain16]

Lets expand a bit bere, the State of Illinois has just about passed full confiscation of firearms legally purchased before the age of 21! Not only are you forbidden from purchasing ANY firearms, you are now going to be required to surrender any firearm you own, no grandfathering, no transfer to an "Adult" or any other work around! No provision is made for your firearms to be returned to you when you reach the age of 21, and no provision is made to pay you for your weapon!
So, not only are you fully and completey denied your guaranteed Constitutional right, you are discriminated against by age and by definition of adulthood! The State has basically just changed all other laws regarding age, making 21 the lawful required age to do any thing!
Tell me other States won't jump all over this if it passes with Kali leading the charge, and OryGun right behind!

I think this one is even more important than the case in Florida. If IL is allowed to confiscate, it sets a very dangerous precedent. I fully expect the NRA to file a lawsuit there should the Republican IL governor sign that bill. It still has to pass their senate, but folks aren't certain if their Governor will sign it - considering he's a good buddy of Rahm Emanuel, I have a feeling he will sign it.

 

[ma96782]

Perhaps........it's just part of the PLAN by the Liberals. Wait a second, while I put on my thinking cap.


Not really me....but laugh alittle.

+++++


OK, Ok, ok......so the Govt makes laws that are IMHO clearly Un-Constitutional. That forces the NRA to spend a great amount of money to file a law suit and to take the issue to the courts. The Govt is paying with TAXPAYER money. Humm........sounds like.......idiots are in charge of the Govt. Mind you, that I'd be ashamed and outraged, that THEY are using my taxpayer money for this use.

I could think of many other uses for TAXPAYER MONEY.

Call it what it is........those Politicians are "UN-AMERICAN." THEY want to destroy the United States Constitution.

Aloha, Mark

PS......STORY TIME:

Right before the 1994 AW Ban came down on freedom. I called my Senator from the State of HI, Daniel Inouye. BTW, in 2000 he was awarded the MOH for his bravery in WW2 (but, that's another story). Ok, Ok, ok.....he didn't talk to me. I'm not a Democrat and I didn't vote for him. I wasn't really expecting that he would talk to me. So anyway, his staffer did.

I asked that she relay my short message.....

That as far as I was concerned......he should retire and or call it quits immediately. I said that he took an oath (I assumed) that he would support and defend the Constitution of The United States against all enemies foreign or domestic. And I continued.....by his voting for the assault weapons ban, well that is the same as destroying the 2nd Amendment.

The staffer said that it was only a matter of opinion. And, that all rights are subject to interpretation and that they aren't absolute.

LOL.....I asked her.....about what, "....shall not be infringed" means? Anyway, we disagreed.

It's funny that later in life.....I was subjected to the "double secret screening procedure" by TSA on many occasions. While the more obvious people, dressed like potential terrorist, whizzed by in line. OMG.....such a racist statement. Rrrrright.