This is one of those headlines that you have to read 6 times to make sense of
It would be easier to grasp if it read “federal judge upholds Colorado’s new law…”
Yes, but “blocks” is more controversial and sensational, which is probably why they chose it.
Seems like a reasonable regulation to me. I’ll be curious to see what impact it has in the coming years.
“the plain text of the Second Amendment covers the possession (‘keep’) and carrying (‘bear’) of arms. A waiting period affects neither right.”
Also the kind of regulation needed for a well regulated Militia. Can’t have people in a militia be armed criminals, psychos, or pure hobbyists… Well, maybe if things are getting really final hour desperate. But I can’t see them fairing well when something just took down the US military and militias and now it’s their turn to stop it.
I mean if someone gets to the US mainland through the US Navy, past the US Coast Guard, through the shield of the US Air Force, onto solid ground past the US Marine Corps, through the layered defenses of the US Army backed by the US National Guard, and then takes out the many layers of US law enforcement like police, sheriffs and US Marshals….then I have to imagine Billy Bob with a rifle ain’t doing shit.
Especially not with Billy Bob’s current state of cardiovascular health and general fitness and mobility over a
milequarter mile.Yeah, it’s not like people have been driving off first world occupations with rusty AK-47s since Vietnam or anything like that…
I’d put more faith in Billy Bob than I would in the police. The police don’t like fights where they don’t have a massive advantage, and they definitely don’t like losing odds. Look at the Uvald shootings as an example. They still had overwhelming numbers there, but didn’t like the odds.
Yeah, it was really intended before we had those things, and still had to worry about the British. And also the natives. Neither presents much of a threat these days, so we should probably circle back on that whole militia thing and see if it’s still needed. I think it’s just a cost center at this point that frankly we could do without and pick up our performance on life expectancy and crime rates.
It wasn’t just to protect the United States against the British and the natives, it was also to protect the people against their own government should it become oppressive. There’s a strong argument that the government has become way too powerful for armed citizens to represent any type of check or balance, but that’s irrelevant for the original intent.
It really wasn’t, as shown by the Whiskey Rebellion. That’s the popular talking point, but it was bullshit then and it’s orders of magnitude more bullshit now.
Even the vaunted successes of the Black Panthers arming up ended up in the destruction of the Panthers via intimidation, arrest, and assassination. Then you have the Davidians and Ruby Ridge.
They want you to have guns, because it makes you feel like you don’t have to do anything. If anything, it makes you more anti-government and paranoid against both the government they’re trying to dismantle and the neighbors they want you to not trust.
Gun nuts are all talk until that “well regulated” part comes up… then they change tactics and still just claim they have a blanket right to bear arms.
Three days? Awe. But I’m angry now!
Seriously, 3 days is shorter than any state I’ve ever lived in. Usually there’s no wait for shotguns though, which are pretty fucking effective anti-personnel weapons. I’ve never understood that exclusion.
Speed cocker? Ohhh I like the sound of that!
“I’d kill you if I had my gun!”
“Well… you don’t”
LOUSY BIG SHOT.
THINKS HE’S SO BIG 'CAUSE HE’S GOT A LOT OF GUNS.
Removed by mod
