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

billh58

(6,635 posts)
Tue Feb 5, 2019, 11:45 AM Feb 2019

POST-HELLER LITIGATION SUMMARY

Since Heller and McDonald, courts have been inundated with claims that various federal, state, and local laws
regulating firearms violate the Second Amendment. These claims have been asserted in both civil lawsuits and
criminal prosecutions—and the vast majority of them have failed. Altogether, in the more than 1,300 state and
federal court decisions tracked by Giffords Law Center since Heller, courts have rejected the Second
Amendment challenges nearly 93% of the time.

As discussed below, courts have upheld numerous commonsense gun laws against Second Amendment
challenges, including laws:

• Requiring “good cause” for the issuance of a permit to carry a concealed firearm;

• Prohibiting the possession of machine guns, assault weapons, and large capacity ammunition
magazines;

• Requiring that firearms be stored in a locked container or other secure manner when not in the
possession of the owner;

• Forbidding gun possession by dangerous persons including those convicted of felonies and
domestic violence crimes, and those who have been involuntarily committed to mental
institutions;

• Requiring the registration of all firearms;

• Forbidding persons under 21 years old from possessing firearms or carrying guns in public;

• Regulating firing ranges, including zoning, construction, and operation requirements;

• Requiring that handguns sold within a state meet certain safety requirements;

• Imposing fees on the commercial sale of handguns to fund firearm safety regulations; and,

• Requiring a waiting period before completing a firearm sale.

By contrast, courts have struck down gun laws in a relatively small number of cases, and even then, they have
been careful to note that the Second Amendment does not prohibit most laws designed to reduce gun violence
.

Moreover, the Supreme Court has declined to review at least 88 Second Amendment cases since Heller, leaving
lower court decisions upholding many reasonable gun laws undisturbed.

http://smartgunlaws.org/gun-deaths-and-injuries-statistics/ (click on "Gun Laws/Second Amendment" for PDF file)


Right-wing Second Amendment absolutists and NRA apologists would have us believe that the strict regulation of deadly weapons is unconstitutional, but the US Court system says otherwise. Common sense gun control regulations are being enacted all across this country, and we are making needed changes in an effort to reduce the needless deaths and injuries due to the gun violence epidemic in this country.

2 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
POST-HELLER LITIGATION SUMMARY (Original Post) billh58 Feb 2019 OP
I believe all this (below) would be "legal" if some state was bold enough to enact it.... Sancho Feb 2019 #1
Thanks for the post billh58 Feb 2019 #2

Sancho

(9,067 posts)
1. I believe all this (below) would be "legal" if some state was bold enough to enact it....
Tue Feb 5, 2019, 12:08 PM
Feb 2019

People Control, Not Gun Control

This is my generic response to gun threads where people are shot and killed by the dumb or criminal possession of guns. For the record, I grew up in the South and on military bases. I was taught about firearms as a child, and I grew up hunting, was a member of the NRA, and I still own guns. In the 70’s, I dropped out of the NRA because they become more radical and less interested in safety and training. Some personal experiences where people I know were involved in shootings caused me to realize that anyone could obtain and posses a gun no matter how illogical it was for them to have a gun. Also, easy access to more powerful guns, guns in the hands of children, and guns that weren’t secured are out of control in our society. As such, here’s what I now think ought to be the requirements to possess a gun. I’m not debating the legal language, I just think it’s the reasonable way to stop the shootings. Notice, none of this restricts the type of guns sold. This is aimed at the people who shoot others, because it’s clear that they should never have had a gun.

1.) Anyone in possession of a gun (whether they own it or not) should have a regularly renewed license. If you want to call it a permit, certificate, or something else that's fine.
2.) To get a license, you should have a background check, and be examined by a professional for emotional and mental stability appropriate for gun possession. It might be appropriate to require that examination to be accompanied by references from family, friends, employers, etc. This check is not to subject you to a mental health diagnosis, just check on your superficial and apparent gun-worthyness.
3.) To get the license, you should be required to take a safety course and pass a test appropriate to the type of gun you want to use.
4.) To get a license, you should be over 21. Under 21, you could only use a gun under direct supervision of a licensed person and after obtaining a learner’s license. Your license might be restricted if you have children or criminals or other unsafe people living in your home. (If you want to argue 18 or 25 or some other age, fine. 21 makes sense to me.)
5.) If you possess a gun, you would have to carry a liability insurance policy specifically for gun ownership - and likely you would have to provide proof of appropriate storage, security, and whatever statistical reasons that emerge that would drive the costs and ability to get insurance.
6.) You could not purchase a gun or ammunition without a license, and purchases would have a waiting period.
7.) If you possess a gun without a license, you go to jail, the gun is impounded, and a judge will have to let you go (just like a DUI).
8.) No one should carry an unsecured gun (except in a locked case, unloaded) when outside of home. Guns should be secure when transporting to a shooting event without demonstrating a special need. Their license should indicate training and special carry circumstances beyond recreational shooting (security guard, etc.). If you are carrying your gun while under the influence of drugs or alcohol, you lose your gun and license.
9.) If you buy, sell, give away, or inherit a gun, your license information should be recorded.
10.) If you accidentally discharge your gun, commit a crime, get referred by a mental health professional, are served a restraining order, etc., you should lose your license and guns until reinstated by a serious relicensing process.

Most of you know that a license is no big deal. Besides a driver’s license you need a license to fish, operate a boat, or many other activities. I realize these differ by state, but that is not a reason to let anyone without a bit of sense pack a semiautomatic weapon in public, on the roads, and in schools. I think we need to make it much harder for some people to have guns.

billh58

(6,635 posts)
2. Thanks for the post
Tue Feb 5, 2019, 12:20 PM
Feb 2019

and I totally agree with you on all points. I believe that we, as a nation, are waking up to the facts about responsible gun ownership and the responsibility that goes with it.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control Reform Activism»POST-HELLER LITIGATION SU...