Advertisements
The Latest:

New Boulder, Colorado AR-15 law seen as TEST for nationwide gun registration

(National SentinelUnconstitutional: Whenever we see the Left moving to implement a new rule or law governing the use, handling, or ownership of firearms we are reminded of the very simple language of the Second Amendment, which reads in full: A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Liberal and conservative scholars and lawmakers have debated the meaning of “militia” and whether or not the founders meant that the Second Amendment applied only to organized state military forces. But others have noted that based on historical data and references such as the Federalist Papers, a series of published documents written by a few of the founders explaining every part of the Constitution, it is clear the amendment applies generally to “the people.”

There’s another part of the amendment that is also crystal clear — where it says unequivocally that the “right …to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

Period. The founders’ statements and writings make it plain that they intended for Americans to be armed — without impediment, without limitations, and without government interference.

So realistically, there can be no such thing as a “common sense gun law” or, certainly, no gun registration. And yet it appears as though a new ordinance in Boulder, Colo., could be a trial run for national gun registration if the wrong political leaders ever take power. (Related: The Second Amendment was made to protect people from their own government.)



As reported by Townhall’s Matt Vespa, Leftist Democrats in the city are singling out one firearm in particular: AR-15-style rifles.

Remember when Boulder, Colorado banned the ownership of AR-15 rifles? They also banned high-capacity magazines and bump stocks, giving gun owners with such magazines until July 15, 2018 to either sell them or dispose of them—whatever that means. Most likely, you’ll have to turn them over to the authorities. Now, there is a grandfather clause allowing residents who already owned AR-15s to keep them as long as they get a certificate by the local sheriff’s office. Well, that date is rapidly approaching. AR-15 owners have until December 27 to certify their weapons. If owners fail to do this, they won’t be allowed to own their rifles within city limits. So far, only 85 rifles have been certified.

‘Certification’ certainly rings of “registration,” doesn’t it?

Not so, according to local authorities. The Denver Post, quoting local police, reported:

Certification is not a registry; the department keeps no records or paperwork of any kind. The only information they have is a handwritten count, said Boulder police Sgt. Dave Spraggs. Eighty-seven certificates have been issued to date. Two of those were redundancies, for the same weapon shared between a husband and wife.

It stretches the imagination to think that Boulder Police are not keeping some sort of record; otherwise, how would the department know that, so far, only 85 rifles had been registered?

What’s more, who else has access to those records? And how are local police going to find out who hasn’t registered certified their rifles?

No matter what Boulder Police tell the local media, the fact is, based on the founders’ historical writings and the very plain language in the Second Amendment, this ordinance and all of those issued previously to the ‘certification’ requirement amount to an infringement on a right that specifically prohibits infringement.

No matter what AR-15s are called — “assault” weapons, mostly — they are just another firearm, as the Supreme Court has ruled, and thus covered by the Second Amendment.

No “reasonable,” “common-sense” restrictions are permitted, period. No infringement whatsoever.

What is interesting is that human nature has not changed since the 18th century when the Constitution was ratified.

“The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes…. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants,” Thomas Jefferson once wrote.

Those words are just as true today.

A version of this story first appeared at NewsTarget.

Never miss a story! Sign up for our daily email newsletter — Click here!


Parler

avatar
4 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
4 Comment authors
GeoffJCProGunFreddesertspeaks Recent comment authors

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  Subscribe  
Notify of
desertspeaks
Guest
desertspeaks

I would point out that those who wish to challenge the right to bear arms in second amendment, should take a close look at the 9th amendment!
Therein you will discover that our natural right to self preservation exists and is unassailable! ‘
9th amendment; The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

You may now stfu!

ProGunFred
Guest

There is only one comma in the 2A, the middle one.

JC
Guest
JC

The time has come to be active resistors to any and all gun “laws”.μολὼν λαβέ!!!

Geoff
Guest
Geoff

ProGunFred is correct. For a long time that is the way it was listed in Wikipedia and then somebody edited it and put the other 2 commas back in around May 2018. That was only in the original document. A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. As ratified on Dec 15th, 1791. ALL gun laws since 1934 are unconstitutional, but nobody has ever challenged them in Court, and the ones that have been, the SCOTUS generally refuses to hear any appeals… Read more »

%d bloggers like this: