Biden on Gun Control

[Ame®icano]

I've made it clear to any sane person that I have no desire to disarm anybody but those who should not be near a gun. It's a shame that your brainwashing doesn't even allow you to hear what I say, much less acknowledge it.

Oh, we wanted to hear you and gave you so many chances.

You've been asked several times what regulation would achieve what you're proposing that is not already regulated, and you refused to answer.

I asked you several times why hew regulations are needed, and you refused to answer that too.

The only one that's not sane here is you, because everything you're proposing is to limit or eliminate rights of the law abiding citizens, which government constitutionally is forbidden to do. In fact, calling that part of the constitution "meaningless remark" you shown complete disrespect to all of us who still appreciate our rights.

And I have repeatedly said what and how any reguations might be enacted is another discussion. My only focus up to now is that the phrase "Shall not be infringed is not a blanket roadblock preventing any regulations whatsoever. In fact it is a dodge. If you are ready to concede that point, we can move to another subject, but one thing at a time is the only way I care to continue.

I did offer that universal background checks would be a good place to start, even though no specific regulaion can be 100% effective, just as no law is 100% effective.

It doesn't matter what you repeated, because to discuss regulation you first have to present that regulation is needed, which you refused, and what you're trying to achieve with regulation, which you also refused. Once you present why regulation is needed, and what you want to regulate, than you ask question, is it constitutional.

But no, since your switch is stuck on stupid, you keep saying that government has blank power to regulate, and that means they can regulate anything they want. No, they don't. They can't regulate individual rights. They're specifically forbidden from doing so by, what you call, "meaningless remark".

Universal background check already exists with NICS. You said NICS only covers licensed dealers, which is true, and you want government to expand it to include every sale. What you want is irrelevant, because it's overreaching government powers and it's infringing individual rights, and that mean's it's unconstitutional. Government power to regulate stops where my rights begin. They have zero power to regulate individual rights. You and your leftists gun grabbers can't accept that? Too bad, I couldn't care less.

Unless you finally answer question I asked: "Why the regulation is needed?", this conversation for me is over.

Wrong.

This is errant, subjective opinion, not a fact of law.

The courts have consistently upheld UBCs to be perfectly Constitutional – no government overreach, no infringement of individual rights, no violation of the Second Amendment.

Government has the authority to place limits and restriction on individual rights provided those limits and restrictions comport with Constitutional case law.

This is the part where you provide the link that support your claim. Law is pretty clear whose rights and what rights can be limited, and we discussed that earlier. Government has no authority over individual rights of law abiding citizens.

Again, link?

 

[Zorro!]

He really is senile.

"Trump is going to try dampening black voter enthusiasm for Biden by contrasting the two men’s criminal justice records."

"The framing will be simple: Trump signed a bipartisan criminal-legal reform bill, the First Step Act, and has been generous with his pardon powers toward unjustly imprisoned black people, like Alice Marie Johnson....
...
Biden’s record is grotesque. Most of its lowlights occurred in the 'tough on crime' 1980s and 1990s... [when] he viciously characterized people who commit crimes as sociopathic 'predators' who are beyond rehabilitation. He cast then-President Bush’s escalation of the War on Drugs as lacking 'enough police officers to catch the violent thugs, enough prosecutors to convict them, enough judges to sentence them, or enough prison cells to put them away for a long time.' He authored the 1994 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act [that]... expanded the death penalty, eliminated education funding for imprisoned students, created harsher sentencing guidelines for a wide range of crimes, and increased funding for local police departments and corrections departments....

He helped catalyze the most dramatic expansion of the prison state in the history of the country with the highest incarceration rate in the world. He said he was 'not at all' ashamed of his involvement as recently as 2016...."

From "On Criminal Justice, Biden Has No Moral Standing Over Trump" by Zak Cheney-Rice (New York Magazine).

 

[M14 Shooter]

The fact that there will never be another Federal AWB

As usual, you have to lie to make a point.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The courts have consistently upheld UBCs to be perfectly Constitutional – no government overreach, no infringement of individual rights, no violation of the Second Amendment.

What courts ruled a legal requirement for a background check in a private sale is constitutional?
Please provide citations.