|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
IL: A smart way to attack Chicago’s illegal gun problem right now
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Known as the Combatting Illegal Gun Trafficking Act, Senate Bill 337 mandates that gun shops take real steps to safeguard against straw purchases. Gun dealers would be required to keep their inventory safe from burglars and smash-and-grab robbers, create and retain accurate and complete records of gun sales that could help police investigate and arrest straw purchasers, maintain video surveillance of purchases, and train employees on how to identify these straw purchasers. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(8/31/2018)
|
"[T]his simply is not a Second Amendment issue."
Yes, it is. Any law that clamps down on lawful purchasers and subjects them to intrusive government attention absent probable cause chills the exercise of 2A rights, whether or not they are the primary targets.
Memo: If it isn't constitutional, YOU MUST FIND ANOTHER WAY. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| For, in principle, there is no difference between a law prohibiting the wearing of concealed arms, and a law forbidding the wearing such as are exposed; and if the former be unconstitutional, the latter must be so likewise. But it should not be forgotten, that it is not only a part of the right that is secured by the constitution; it is the right entire and complete, as it existed at the adoption of the constitution; and if any portion of that right be impaired, immaterial how small the part may be, and immaterial the order of time at which it be done, it is equally forbidden by the constitution. [Bliss vs. Commonwealth, 12 Ky. (2 Litt.) 90, at 92, and 93, 13 Am. Dec. 251 (1822) |
|
|
