Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
The first step toward "doing something" about America's mass shooting problem is to elect Democrats
https://signalpress.blogspot.com/2022/07/highland-park-illinois-july-4th-2022.htmlHow many times, in the comments that have been made over these past weeks since Uvalde, as other mass shootings happen and then, this tragedy at a July 4th parade, has the statement been made, "We need to do something about this."
The first meaningful gun control legislation in years was passed by Congress fairly quickly after the Uvalde incident. That means that Congress does feel the pressure. We know that banning assault rifles works, because it has happened before, and the courts were fine with its constitutionality. So do what the people are asking to be done.
The first step toward doing this is to elect Democrats.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
2 replies, 945 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (15)
ReplyReply to this post
2 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The first step toward "doing something" about America's mass shooting problem is to elect Democrats (Original Post)
lees1975
Jul 2022
OP
DetroitLegalBeagle
(1,922 posts)1. This latest ruling has changed things
We know that banning assault rifles works, because it has happened before, and the courts were fine with its constitutionality.
Key word is were. They aren't anymore. SCOTUS vacated rulings regarding Maryland's assault weapons ban and NJ and CA's large capacity magazine restrictions. If they were fine with those rulings, they could of let them stand. But they didn't. They vacated the rulings and ordered the lower courts to reevaluate them in light of the new review standard set in Bruen. The 9th circuit did the same with a challenge to CA assault weapons ban, they kicked the case back down to the district court to reevaluate using the new SCOTUS guidance.
lees1975
(3,845 posts)2. Yes, that's a longer term change
but there is a judicial element which doesn't see restrictions, bans of assault weapons and conditional gun ownership as unconstitutional. We are at this point now because our constituency hasn't elevated this issue to the same priority level as some of the fringe issues get, and because we haven't paid much attention to all of the technical work on blocking majority rule that our opponents have done.
It takes time, which is why elections are important. The political capital is adding up. It is inexcusable now for Democrats to fail to show up at the polls and cast a ballot.