Leftists Now Clamoring To Get Guns And Finding Out It's Not That Easy

[rightwinger]

In a crisis,

Some people horde water
Some horde food
Some people horde toilet paper

Conservatives......I need more guns!

It's not Conservatives scrambling for guns Shitflinger, we already have them. It's you moron Communists finally figuring out that home protection isn't 911, it's 9mm

Exactly

Those with a shitload of guns are buying more

 

[rightwinger]

Glad you brought that one up. Did you read the part about the State doing Due Process? Let me explain that to you. Due process is done through legislation or judicial. Translation to firearms, that means if a state, county or city determines that they have a special need for a regulation then they have the right to use due process to regulate the firearm. Gee, isn't the Constitution of the United States a wonderful document.

All American citizens have equal protected rights Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Google Search
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, Constitutional amendment

You keep leaving out "without due process". The States have the ability to use due process, the Feds don't. The biggest problem with you rtwingnutjobs is you cry "Constitution" over and over but you only want to follow the parts that agrees with you and you leave out the things that don't. A true American follows the whole document, not just the parts that agree with us. You want to act like a Patriot, follow ALL of the Constitution like I do.

idiot all citizens in the U.S. have the same rights
due process is when someone commits a crime not when law makers create a law

Encyclopedia Britannica
The meaning of due process as it relates to substantive enactments and procedural legislation has evolved over decades of controversial interpretation by the Supreme Court. Today, if a law may reasonably be deemed to promote the public welfare and the means selected bear a reasonable relationship to the legitimate public interest, then the law has met the due process standard. If the law seeks to regulate a fundamental right, such as the right to travel or the right to vote, then this enactment must meet a stricter judicial scrutiny, known as the compelling interest test. Economic legislation is generally upheld if the state can point to any conceivable public benefit resulting from its enactment.

This can be done in one of three way. At the Voting Booths, the Legislature, and the Courts. And it applies to everyone not excluding criminals. If you look at what is going around you, you will see hundreds if not thousands of "Due Process" examples in your life.

Firearms fall under the protection of the U.S. Constitution supreme law of the land supersedes state laws
Citizens of one state have the same rights as citizens of any state equal protection of the law

Each state has its own gun laws

 

[Daryl Hunt]

The 14th amendment section 1 ........No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

You keep repeating the law but you keep not reading "without due process of law" over and over. This is why the Federal Courts have no choice but to rule in favor of many of the gun regs for the States, Counties and Cities. The Supreme Court doesn't make laws, they make their ruling according to the Constitution. All of the Constitution not just the parts that agree with you.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The 14th amendment section 1 ........No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

without due process of law

From the Encyclopedia Britannica

The meaning of due process as it relates to substantive enactments and procedural legislation has evolved over decades of controversial interpretation by the Supreme Court. Today, if a law may reasonably be deemed to promote the public welfare and the means selected bear a reasonable relationship to the legitimate public interest, then the law has met the due process standard. If the law seeks to regulate a fundamental right, such as the right to travel or the right to vote, then this enactment must meet a stricter judicial scrutiny, known as the compelling interest test. Economic legislation is generally upheld if the state can point to any conceivable public benefit resulting from its enactment.

Firearms fall can fall under Public Safety and therefore can fall under the due process clause of both the 5th and 14th ammendment.

Firearms fall under the protection of the U.S. Constitution supreme law of the land supersedes state laws
Citizens of one state have the same rights as citizens of any state equal protection of the law

Who's supreme law of the land? If you go by the Constitution, if due process is used by the state then firearm regulations ARE legal and they have been upheld by the Supreme Court. The one law that may have trouble passing the muster would be the 1934 Firearms Act because the Federals are not exempt according to the 5th amendment. But that was corrected with the 14th ammendment so that means that the 1934 Firearms Act is legal. As long as due process is used it will stand up in court because that's right out of the Constitution of the United States. If you don't like it, get it changed. Many have tried, few have succeeded.

Dumbass look at the 14th amendment sectin one
No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

This means no state can create a law that would deprive citizens of that state that other citizens in other states have that are protected by the U.S. Constitution
It kills your due process bullshit argument time to move your goal post

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The 14th amendment section 1 ........No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

You keep repeating the law but you keep not reading "without due process of law" over and over. This is why the Federal Courts have no choice but to rule in favor of many of the gun regs for the States, Counties and Cities. The Supreme Court doesn't make laws, they make their ruling according to the Constitution. All of the Constitution not just the parts that agree with you.

no law can be created that would deprive the rights of a citizen that other citizens have

 

[Daryl Hunt]

The 14th amendment section 1 ........No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

without due process of law

From the Encyclopedia Britannica

The meaning of due process as it relates to substantive enactments and procedural legislation has evolved over decades of controversial interpretation by the Supreme Court. Today, if a law may reasonably be deemed to promote the public welfare and the means selected bear a reasonable relationship to the legitimate public interest, then the law has met the due process standard. If the law seeks to regulate a fundamental right, such as the right to travel or the right to vote, then this enactment must meet a stricter judicial scrutiny, known as the compelling interest test. Economic legislation is generally upheld if the state can point to any conceivable public benefit resulting from its enactment.

Firearms fall can fall under Public Safety and therefore can fall under the due process clause of both the 5th and 14th ammendment.

Firearms fall under the protection of the U.S. Constitution supreme law of the land supersedes state laws
Citizens of one state have the same rights as citizens of any state equal protection of the law

Who's supreme law of the land? If you go by the Constitution, if due process is used by the state then firearm regulations ARE legal and they have been upheld by the Supreme Court. The one law that may have trouble passing the muster would be the 1934 Firearms Act because the Federals are not exempt according to the 5th amendment. But that was corrected with the 14th ammendment so that means that the 1934 Firearms Act is legal. As long as due process is used it will stand up in court because that's right out of the Constitution of the United States. If you don't like it, get it changed. Many have tried, few have succeeded.

Dumbass look at the 14th amendment sectin one
No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

This means no state can create a law that would deprive citizens of that state that other citizens in other states have that are protected by the U.S. Constitution
It kills your due process bullshit argument time to move your goal post

Read the whole thing. Not just the opening sentence. "without due process" is as important as the first few words. You want to call yourself an American? Follow the whole Constitution of the United States without excluding anything.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

The 14th amendment section 1 ........No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

You keep repeating the law but you keep not reading "without due process of law" over and over. This is why the Federal Courts have no choice but to rule in favor of many of the gun regs for the States, Counties and Cities. The Supreme Court doesn't make laws, they make their ruling according to the Constitution. All of the Constitution not just the parts that agree with you.

no law can be created that would deprive the rights of a citizen that other citizens have

Without Due Process. You keep leaving that part out, cupcake.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

All American citizens have equal protected rights Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Google Search
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, Constitutional amendment

You keep leaving out "without due process". The States have the ability to use due process, the Feds don't. The biggest problem with you rtwingnutjobs is you cry "Constitution" over and over but you only want to follow the parts that agrees with you and you leave out the things that don't. A true American follows the whole document, not just the parts that agree with us. You want to act like a Patriot, follow ALL of the Constitution like I do.

idiot all citizens in the U.S. have the same rights
due process is when someone commits a crime not when law makers create a law

Encyclopedia Britannica
The meaning of due process as it relates to substantive enactments and procedural legislation has evolved over decades of controversial interpretation by the Supreme Court. Today, if a law may reasonably be deemed to promote the public welfare and the means selected bear a reasonable relationship to the legitimate public interest, then the law has met the due process standard. If the law seeks to regulate a fundamental right, such as the right to travel or the right to vote, then this enactment must meet a stricter judicial scrutiny, known as the compelling interest test. Economic legislation is generally upheld if the state can point to any conceivable public benefit resulting from its enactment.

This can be done in one of three way. At the Voting Booths, the Legislature, and the Courts. And it applies to everyone not excluding criminals. If you look at what is going around you, you will see hundreds if not thousands of "Due Process" examples in your life.

Firearms fall under the protection of the U.S. Constitution supreme law of the land supersedes state laws
Citizens of one state have the same rights as citizens of any state equal protection of the law

Each state has its own gun laws

and they are unconstitutional so says the 14th amendment

 

[BWK]

"First came the panic buying of hand sanitizer. Then, people panic bought toilet paper. Now, food shelves are emptying and firearm and ammunition sales are through the roof. The COVID19 outbreak might be bad for the stock market, but it’s certainly been a boon for very specific sectors of the economy. The gun industry, used to such boom/bust cycles, knows how to respond – but other sectors might not be so acclimated.

Here at Omaha Outdoors, we’ve been inundated with inquiries from out-of-state folks – many from California – asking if we can ship them a gun directly. The answer is, of course, no. Despite what politicians and many in popular media claim, you can’t buy a gun online and have it shipped to your house. Well, you could, if you were a federally licensed firearm dealer (or federally licensed curio and relic collector) and your home was your place of business. Other than that, no, you can’t buy a gun online and have it shipped, especially across state lines, to your home."

A Lot of People Are Finding Out You Can’t Just Buy a Gun Online - Omaha Outdoors

---------------------

I never tire of proving these anti-gun idiots wrong.

Don't need them. Already got plenty.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The 14th amendment section 1 ........No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

You keep repeating the law but you keep not reading "without due process of law" over and over. This is why the Federal Courts have no choice but to rule in favor of many of the gun regs for the States, Counties and Cities. The Supreme Court doesn't make laws, they make their ruling according to the Constitution. All of the Constitution not just the parts that agree with you.

no law can be created that would deprive the rights of a citizen that other citizens have

Without Due Process. You keep leaving that part out, cupcake.

Incorrect
all citizens are protected by equal rights a state cannot create a law that deprives them of rights all citizens have under the U.S. Constitution
Due process is when a citizen has been convicted of a crime

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The 14th amendment section 1 ........No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

And?

Residents of Colorado who believed that UBCs violated their rights under the Second Amendment were afforded their full and comprehensive right to due process and equal protection of the law, consistent with the 14th Amendment.

UBCs do not violate the Second Amendment, do not deny gun owners their right to due process or equal protection of the law.

As an aside, it’s telling the hypocrisy of conservatives and their avid support of 14th Amendment jurisprudence when it comes to laws regulating firearms but that support of 14th Amendment case law goes out the window when it comes to laws that disadvantage gay Americans and violate a woman’s right to privacy.

Conservatives can’t have it both ways.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

You keep leaving out "without due process". The States have the ability to use due process, the Feds don't. The biggest problem with you rtwingnutjobs is you cry "Constitution" over and over but you only want to follow the parts that agrees with you and you leave out the things that don't. A true American follows the whole document, not just the parts that agree with us. You want to act like a Patriot, follow ALL of the Constitution like I do.

idiot all citizens in the U.S. have the same rights
due process is when someone commits a crime not when law makers create a law

Encyclopedia Britannica
The meaning of due process as it relates to substantive enactments and procedural legislation has evolved over decades of controversial interpretation by the Supreme Court. Today, if a law may reasonably be deemed to promote the public welfare and the means selected bear a reasonable relationship to the legitimate public interest, then the law has met the due process standard. If the law seeks to regulate a fundamental right, such as the right to travel or the right to vote, then this enactment must meet a stricter judicial scrutiny, known as the compelling interest test. Economic legislation is generally upheld if the state can point to any conceivable public benefit resulting from its enactment.

This can be done in one of three way. At the Voting Booths, the Legislature, and the Courts. And it applies to everyone not excluding criminals. If you look at what is going around you, you will see hundreds if not thousands of "Due Process" examples in your life.

Firearms fall under the protection of the U.S. Constitution supreme law of the land supersedes state laws
Citizens of one state have the same rights as citizens of any state equal protection of the law

Each state has its own gun laws

and they are unconstitutional so says the 14th amendment

Unless they meet the due process requirement. Once again, you left that part out. Tell you what. I am going to make some demands to USMB. See if you agree with them. Since you like to only use part of the Constitution, I get to do the same thing. Here are my demands.

I only want to see post by people that only agree with me so we need to modify the 1st amendment. So you will have all your posts deleted and you will be banned for life

We are going to modify the 4th amendment to read that if you post one single post (just before you are banned for life) the Government shall seize your computer after ransacking your home without notice.

We are going to charge you with a crime (We'll make something up) and hold you in jail forever without allowing you to go to trial, have legal representation. In affect, make you dissappear. Yes, let's modify the 6th amendment for you rtwingnutjobs only.

While we are at it, just for you rtwingnutjobs, you can't get a jury under the 7th amendment but that's not a problem with the modified 6th amendment.

Let's throw out the 8th in your case while we are at it. No bail at all. And Hogs will live better than you.

Now, I demand these things or I am going to throw myself to the ground in a fit of rage. (and probably miss)

Careful, Ladies, The 19th may be next (ducking)

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The 14th amendment section 1 ........No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

without due process of law

From the Encyclopedia Britannica

The meaning of due process as it relates to substantive enactments and procedural legislation has evolved over decades of controversial interpretation by the Supreme Court. Today, if a law may reasonably be deemed to promote the public welfare and the means selected bear a reasonable relationship to the legitimate public interest, then the law has met the due process standard. If the law seeks to regulate a fundamental right, such as the right to travel or the right to vote, then this enactment must meet a stricter judicial scrutiny, known as the compelling interest test. Economic legislation is generally upheld if the state can point to any conceivable public benefit resulting from its enactment.

Firearms fall can fall under Public Safety and therefore can fall under the due process clause of both the 5th and 14th ammendment.

Firearms fall under the protection of the U.S. Constitution supreme law of the land supersedes state laws
Citizens of one state have the same rights as citizens of any state equal protection of the law

Who's supreme law of the land? If you go by the Constitution, if due process is used by the state then firearm regulations ARE legal and they have been upheld by the Supreme Court. The one law that may have trouble passing the muster would be the 1934 Firearms Act because the Federals are not exempt according to the 5th amendment. But that was corrected with the 14th ammendment so that means that the 1934 Firearms Act is legal. As long as due process is used it will stand up in court because that's right out of the Constitution of the United States. If you don't like it, get it changed. Many have tried, few have succeeded.

Dumbass look at the 14th amendment sectin one
No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

This means no state can create a law that would deprive citizens of that state that other citizens in other states have that are protected by the U.S. Constitution
It kills your due process bullshit argument time to move your goal post

Wrong.

See the Slaughter-House Cases (1873) with regard to the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the 14th Amendment.

In essence, the 14th Amendment codifies the doctrine of inalienable rights, where the protected liberties of citizens who reside in the states cannot be violated by state government – even if a law enacted by the state reflects the will of the majority of the people.

The courts decide when a state has acted contrary to the 14th Amendment and violated the rights of citizens residing in that state.

And the courts have determined that states which have enacted UBCs have governed in accordance with the 14th Amendment.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The 14th amendment section 1 ........No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

You keep repeating the law but you keep not reading "without due process of law" over and over. This is why the Federal Courts have no choice but to rule in favor of many of the gun regs for the States, Counties and Cities. The Supreme Court doesn't make laws, they make their ruling according to the Constitution. All of the Constitution not just the parts that agree with you.

no law can be created that would deprive the rights of a citizen that other citizens have

And UBCs are no such law – they do not violate the rights of residents in states with UCBs; that other states may not have laws authorizing UCBs is irrelevant.

 

[rightwinger]

The 14th amendment section 1 ........No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

without due process of law

From the Encyclopedia Britannica

The meaning of due process as it relates to substantive enactments and procedural legislation has evolved over decades of controversial interpretation by the Supreme Court. Today, if a law may reasonably be deemed to promote the public welfare and the means selected bear a reasonable relationship to the legitimate public interest, then the law has met the due process standard. If the law seeks to regulate a fundamental right, such as the right to travel or the right to vote, then this enactment must meet a stricter judicial scrutiny, known as the compelling interest test. Economic legislation is generally upheld if the state can point to any conceivable public benefit resulting from its enactment.

Firearms fall can fall under Public Safety and therefore can fall under the due process clause of both the 5th and 14th ammendment.

Firearms fall under the protection of the U.S. Constitution supreme law of the land supersedes state laws
Citizens of one state have the same rights as citizens of any state equal protection of the law

Who's supreme law of the land? If you go by the Constitution, if due process is used by the state then firearm regulations ARE legal and they have been upheld by the Supreme Court. The one law that may have trouble passing the muster would be the 1934 Firearms Act because the Federals are not exempt according to the 5th amendment. But that was corrected with the 14th ammendment so that means that the 1934 Firearms Act is legal. As long as due process is used it will stand up in court because that's right out of the Constitution of the United States. If you don't like it, get it changed. Many have tried, few have succeeded.

Dumbass look at the 14th amendment sectin one
No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

This means no state can create a law that would deprive citizens of that state that other citizens in other states have that are protected by the U.S. Constitution
It kills your due process bullshit argument time to move your goal post

All laws abridge the privileges of citizens

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

You keep leaving out "without due process". The States have the ability to use due process, the Feds don't. The biggest problem with you rtwingnutjobs is you cry "Constitution" over and over but you only want to follow the parts that agrees with you and you leave out the things that don't. A true American follows the whole document, not just the parts that agree with us. You want to act like a Patriot, follow ALL of the Constitution like I do.

idiot all citizens in the U.S. have the same rights
due process is when someone commits a crime not when law makers create a law

Encyclopedia Britannica
The meaning of due process as it relates to substantive enactments and procedural legislation has evolved over decades of controversial interpretation by the Supreme Court. Today, if a law may reasonably be deemed to promote the public welfare and the means selected bear a reasonable relationship to the legitimate public interest, then the law has met the due process standard. If the law seeks to regulate a fundamental right, such as the right to travel or the right to vote, then this enactment must meet a stricter judicial scrutiny, known as the compelling interest test. Economic legislation is generally upheld if the state can point to any conceivable public benefit resulting from its enactment.

This can be done in one of three way. At the Voting Booths, the Legislature, and the Courts. And it applies to everyone not excluding criminals. If you look at what is going around you, you will see hundreds if not thousands of "Due Process" examples in your life.

Firearms fall under the protection of the U.S. Constitution supreme law of the land supersedes state laws
Citizens of one state have the same rights as citizens of any state equal protection of the law

Each state has its own gun laws

and they are unconstitutional so says the 14th amendment

Also wrong.

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

Only the courts have the authority to determine when a state measure violates the Constitution.

And save the inane sophistry that the courts ‘sometimes get it wrong.’

 

[2aguy]

The 14th amendment section 1 ........No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

And?

Residents of Colorado who believed that UBCs violated their rights under the Second Amendment were afforded their full and comprehensive right to due process and equal protection of the law, consistent with the 14th Amendment.

UBCs do not violate the Second Amendment, do not deny gun owners their right to due process or equal protection of the law.

As an aside, it’s telling the hypocrisy of conservatives and their avid support of 14th Amendment jurisprudence when it comes to laws regulating firearms but that support of 14th Amendment case law goes out the window when it comes to laws that disadvantage gay Americans and violate a woman’s right to privacy.

Conservatives can’t have it both ways.

It hasn't been taken to court.....so you are wrong......and Background checks violate ther Right against self incrimination......in the exercise of a Right...

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The 14th amendment section 1 ........No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

You keep repeating the law but you keep not reading "without due process of law" over and over. This is why the Federal Courts have no choice but to rule in favor of many of the gun regs for the States, Counties and Cities. The Supreme Court doesn't make laws, they make their ruling according to the Constitution. All of the Constitution not just the parts that agree with you.

no law can be created that would deprive the rights of a citizen that other citizens have

And UBCs are no such law – they do not violate the rights of residents in states with UCBs; that other states may not have laws authorizing UCBs is irrelevant.

just like the citizens of North Carolina voted for amendment 2 the sex you were born with is the bathroom you use it was struck down as unconstitutional therefore you argument is moot

 

[bigrebnc1775]

idiot all citizens in the U.S. have the same rights
due process is when someone commits a crime not when law makers create a law

Encyclopedia Britannica
The meaning of due process as it relates to substantive enactments and procedural legislation has evolved over decades of controversial interpretation by the Supreme Court. Today, if a law may reasonably be deemed to promote the public welfare and the means selected bear a reasonable relationship to the legitimate public interest, then the law has met the due process standard. If the law seeks to regulate a fundamental right, such as the right to travel or the right to vote, then this enactment must meet a stricter judicial scrutiny, known as the compelling interest test. Economic legislation is generally upheld if the state can point to any conceivable public benefit resulting from its enactment.

This can be done in one of three way. At the Voting Booths, the Legislature, and the Courts. And it applies to everyone not excluding criminals. If you look at what is going around you, you will see hundreds if not thousands of "Due Process" examples in your life.

Firearms fall under the protection of the U.S. Constitution supreme law of the land supersedes state laws
Citizens of one state have the same rights as citizens of any state equal protection of the law

Each state has its own gun laws

and they are unconstitutional so says the 14th amendment

Also wrong.

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

Only the courts have the authority to determine when a state measure violates the Constitution.

And save the inane sophistry that the courts ‘sometimes get it wrong.’

the 14th amendment says a state cannot create a law that would deprive citizens of that state their that is shared with other citizens in other states have
So your wrong

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The 14th amendment section 1 ........No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

without due process of law

From the Encyclopedia Britannica

The meaning of due process as it relates to substantive enactments and procedural legislation has evolved over decades of controversial interpretation by the Supreme Court. Today, if a law may reasonably be deemed to promote the public welfare and the means selected bear a reasonable relationship to the legitimate public interest, then the law has met the due process standard. If the law seeks to regulate a fundamental right, such as the right to travel or the right to vote, then this enactment must meet a stricter judicial scrutiny, known as the compelling interest test. Economic legislation is generally upheld if the state can point to any conceivable public benefit resulting from its enactment.

Firearms fall can fall under Public Safety and therefore can fall under the due process clause of both the 5th and 14th ammendment.

Firearms fall under the protection of the U.S. Constitution supreme law of the land supersedes state laws
Citizens of one state have the same rights as citizens of any state equal protection of the law

Who's supreme law of the land? If you go by the Constitution, if due process is used by the state then firearm regulations ARE legal and they have been upheld by the Supreme Court. The one law that may have trouble passing the muster would be the 1934 Firearms Act because the Federals are not exempt according to the 5th amendment. But that was corrected with the 14th ammendment so that means that the 1934 Firearms Act is legal. As long as due process is used it will stand up in court because that's right out of the Constitution of the United States. If you don't like it, get it changed. Many have tried, few have succeeded.

Dumbass look at the 14th amendment sectin one
No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

This means no state can create a law that would deprive citizens of that state that other citizens in other states have that are protected by the U.S. Constitution
It kills your due process bullshit argument time to move your goal post

All laws abridge the privileges of citizens

and they have been struck down