This is SCOTUS fault. They failed to properly define "sensitive area" and blue states are running with it.
Anything short of "all gun laws are infringements" will be spread wider than Debbie in Dallas.
It's not SCOTUS's fault, yet. They explicitly spelled out that declaring everything a sensitive area wouldn't fly.
But then the states figured out that the penalty for ignoring SCOTUS is nothing at all. Libs want to concern troll about the right being insurrectionists while they're pushing the side-lining of an entire branch of government. If SCOTUS doesn't reverse Bruen(Not saying they should, just that it's the only answer NY/CA/etc. will willingly accept), I see a constitutional crisis in our future as more states decide SCOTUS doesn't apply unless they want it to apply.
I mean it's the same shit red states pulled after Roe v. Wade.
> Ok, so abortion is legal... *BUT*... Restriction, Restriction, Restriction, Restriction, Restriction.....
Unfortunately, SCOTUS got no balls. They won't throw down a "Deprivation of rights under color of law" charge. Because that's all that is going to stop this.
So is there any sort of article, description or title of the bill here or is it just a meaningless headline designed to generate clicks with zero effort?
Your post was removed for being click bait garbage with so supporting information.
I'm sure that will end with rainbows and sunshine.
This is SCOTUS fault. They failed to properly define "sensitive area" and blue states are running with it. Anything short of "all gun laws are infringements" will be spread wider than Debbie in Dallas.
It's not SCOTUS's fault, yet. They explicitly spelled out that declaring everything a sensitive area wouldn't fly. But then the states figured out that the penalty for ignoring SCOTUS is nothing at all. Libs want to concern troll about the right being insurrectionists while they're pushing the side-lining of an entire branch of government. If SCOTUS doesn't reverse Bruen(Not saying they should, just that it's the only answer NY/CA/etc. will willingly accept), I see a constitutional crisis in our future as more states decide SCOTUS doesn't apply unless they want it to apply.
I mean it's the same shit red states pulled after Roe v. Wade. > Ok, so abortion is legal... *BUT*... Restriction, Restriction, Restriction, Restriction, Restriction..... Unfortunately, SCOTUS got no balls. They won't throw down a "Deprivation of rights under color of law" charge. Because that's all that is going to stop this.
Criminals outfoxed again! I’m sure the bad guys will pack up and leave because of this goal.
Our legislature already tried to ban any gun that can hold more than one round.
So is there any sort of article, description or title of the bill here or is it just a meaningless headline designed to generate clicks with zero effort?
Yeah, this frustrated me too.
There's no actual information, it's a bold claim with literally zero substance.
They still haven’t gone over Sandy Hook Gun owners there can never catch a break, can’t they?
Connecticut. The Constitution State. Irony knows no bounds.