Editor’s note: This piece includes some satire.
The recent SCOTUS decision in United States v. Rahimi, which allows for the ban of certain firearms and limited magazine capacities in certain jurisdictions, allows leftists to take a victory lap and salivate at the possibilities of nuanced, back-door legislation. Amendments with new-and-improved workarounds and emergency implementation will certainly follow the next mass shooting, just as long as it’s a spree that fits the narrative—we’re not counting the mass shootings in gun-controlled Chicago of course.
But first, a little context from an article at the Los Angeles Times:
A long-awaited U.S. Supreme Court decision upholding a federal law barring domestic abusers from possessing firearms will have a narrower impact than some had hoped, but it will nonetheless play an important role in reshaping gun laws in California and across the country, legal experts said.
Among the laws Friday’s decision could affect are California’s bans on assault-style weapons and large-capacity ammunition magazines, both of which are facing legal challenges in the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.
Adam Winkler, a UCLA law professor who focuses on 2nd Amendment law, said nothing in the high court’s decision in United States vs. Rahimi ‘makes it crystal clear how those cases are going to play out.’
But, he said, the decision does give lower court judges a wider legal pathway for finding California’s modern gun laws legitimate…
‘There’s no doubt that it’s a major win for gun safety advocates,’ Winkler said.
It won’t be long before the Safety Nazis put on their hobnail boots and start goose-stepping additional “common sense” legislation into our lives, targeting every imaginable, and potentially deadly, weapon.
Why? Because they know best and that’s what they do.
Societal “safety” decrees have been embraced by visionaries like Chairman Mao, Pol Pot, and crazy uncles Joseph S. and Adolf H., who applied the rationale to “protect” the people—several million souls promptly disappeared.
Rules and regulations, in the hands and control of bureaucrats and political zealots, tend to evolve through reimagined interpretations, enhanced details, legal decisions and finely-tuned “improvements,” usually to the advantage of one group over another.
The evolution of this SCOTUS decision to include knives (as in England where police are permitted to destroy knives they find on private property and suspect could be used in a crime), slingshots (as in Australia), swords, spears, and sharp objects, is inevitable.
A “non-partisan” coalition of the Brady Campaign, the United Nations’s Global Firearms Program, and the Ad Council (your tax dollars at work) may launch a “gun violence” awareness campaign, educating the masses on the ownership exclusion criteria, and what to look out for.
The post SCOTUS Decision on Gun Rights Is the Proverbial ‘Camel’s Nose’ appeared first on LewRockwell.