Meet Pete Serrano, Washington’s Next Attorney General [Watch]
Really?
Anybody care to tell me what “constitutional, rational firearm regulations that respect the rights of law-abiding citizens while ensuring public safety” means, and how that differs from “gun safety laws are constitutional and not in conflict with Second Amendment rights”?
[Via Jess]
Let me guess. Yet another commie posing as a politician in need of a long drop on a short rope.
Firstly, the phrase “Second Amendment rights” implies that RKBA some how originates or “is granted” by that piece of the Bill of Rights. It does not. Those unclear on the concept should read up on the topic of US v Cruikshank.
Secondly, since the Second includes the phrase “shall not be infringed”. it’s difficult for me to imagine a law that restricts The People’s right to acquire, own, or carry arms in any way to be constitutional.
Now, it someone was to write a law requiring each family to have a military pattern rifle for each member over the age of 18 and a minimum of 1000 rounds of ball ammo for each rifle in stripper clips, magazines, and bandoliers as appropriate, I could go for that being constitutional. As for the “gun safety” angle, how about a law requiring said family to show up at a local range periodically for training and/or retraining on marksmanship and safe handling of firearms and to have their required equipment checked out by an armorer. I’m pretty sure that would be constitutional. After all, not only is it in the Constitution (See Article I, Section VIII, Clauses XV and XVI) it’s what the Swiss do, and it’s pretty clear that our militia was patterned after theirs.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-1/section-8/clause-15%E2%80%9316
The Constitution declares that we ALL have the RIGHT to keep and bear arms. That is not a mandaate, nor does it provide ANY wriggle room to mandate the things you suggest. NO no no. This is a right, NOT a mandate. Yet you would make it a mandate.. and add a pile of compliance requirements.
I’d be OK with mandating that local LE, probably the County sheriff, make available to each of their constituents the training, gun checks, range time, etc, to each of their constituents, and on the public dime. Nor would I ever support a mandate that everyone have at their disposal any particular type or class of weapinm or even any weapon at all.
He does claim he will enforce the laws evenly, no respect to the position of the accused. This is good. THEN he, in the same breath, declares he will also make sure each law is constutitional before enforcing it. If he does ONLY that it will be a massive improvement. Rov McKenna was the only decent AtG we’ve had since long before queen Christine Gregoire held that position and showed us just how corupt this state government can be.
I’d like to see this guy make clear statements on his view of the cnstitutioanlity of our present gun control laws.. UBC, ten day wait, one gun a month, mag cap ban, AWB, parts sales bans, and also his take on the current status of the many gun controllaws now under challange in our corrupt state court system… as AtG he could end many of those cases Fergusonhas been pressing for years. Other family and chidrens issues are in similar struggles because of Furgie’s perversions.