The New Federal Gun Law Violates Our Civil Liberties
It is unlikely to stop mass shootings, but it will restrict Second Amendment rights and unjustly send people to prison.
HD Download"I'm about to sign into law a bipartisan … gun safety legislation," President Joe Biden said at the signing of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act on June 25. "And time is of the essence. Lives will be saved….When it seems impossible to get anything done in Washington, we are doing something consequential. If we can reach compromise on guns, we ought to be able to reach compromise in other critical issues."
Reason Senior Editor Jacob Sullum takes a different view. "The new gun law is not an inspiring example of bipartisan cooperation to protect public safety," he says. "It's an illustration of how the worst instincts of both major parties combine to produce policies that are neither just nor sensible."
This video essay is based on Sullum's July 20 column, "A New Gun Law Reflects the Worst Instincts of Both Parties," and his follow-up article, "Gun Owners Who Are Disqualified Under State Law Can Now Be Charged With 'Trafficking in Firearms'"
Written by Jacob Sullum; edited by Regan Taylor; audio by Ian Keyser.
Photo credits: Alex Milan Tracy/Sipa USA/Newscom; Alejandro Alvarez/Sipa USA/Newscom; California Revealed, archive.com; CNP/AdMedia/Newscom; Diego Delso, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons; Exile on Ontario St from Montreal, Canada, CC BY-SA 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons; F. Carter Smith / SplashNews/Newscom; GoToVan from Vancouver, Canada, CC BY 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons;John Roca / SplashNews/Newscom; Michael Brochstein/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom; Rod Lamkey/CNP / SplashNews/Newscom; Shawn Thew / Pool via CNP / SplashNews/Newscom; SDB/ZOJ/Sheri Determan/WENN/Newscom; Steve Morgan, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons; Pool/Sipa USA/Newscom; Yuri Gripas/UPI/Newscom.
Music credits: "Leaving Home" (Instrumental Version), by Oran Loyfer; Too Many Steps, (Instrumental Version), by Oran Loyfer.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Fuck Joe Biden.
Fuck Joe Biden
His name is Robert Paulson.
Is that what you call your penis?
I made $30,030 in just 5 weeks working part-time right from my apartment. When I lost my last business I got tired right away and luckily I found this job online and with that I am able to start reaping lots right through my house. Anyone can achieve this top level career and make more money online by:-
Reading this article:>> https://oldprofits.blogspot.com/
I feel your pain loser. Maybe try some kind of salve for the butt hurt.
Now the other gimp shows up.
Do not engage Joe Asshole; simply reply with insults.
Not a one of his posts is worth refuting; like turd he lies and never does anything other than lie. If something in one of Joe Asshole’s posts is not a lie, it is there by mistake. Joe Asshole lies; it's what he does.
Joe Asshole is a psychopathic liar; he is too stupid to recognize the fact, but everybody knows it. You might just as well attempt to reason with or correct a random handful of mud as engage Joe Asshole.
Do not engage Joe Asshole; simply reply with insults; Joe Asshole deserves nothing other.
Eat shit and die, Asshole
Republican ratfucking has gotten so unsophisticated. I guess that's the point: make our voters so fucking stupid they don't need an argument at all, just an instruction.
Cry harder.
Projection, projection; always *projection* with you, Tony. Do you work at a movie theater?
You elected Biden and Harris. Calling anybody stupid is ironic at best.
Look at the leftists at Reason supporting gun control. Again.
Poor sarc.
I’m astonished that however bad he is, he somehow always gets worse.
Untreated STD's follow that pattern. Just sayin'.
Maybe it’s a brain-eating amoeba.
Have you been swimming lately sarcasmic?
That’s how they get in your brain.
Zzzz
Try to pick a style and stick with it.
Sarcasm?
Insults?
Rage?
Exaggeration?
Conversational?
Facts and enlightenment?
Mixing them up seems to just confused you.
Mixing them up seems to just confused you.
Yeah.
Who’s confused?
It is so bad that just typing it confused me!
…unjustly send people to prison.
Feature, not a bug.
"Republicans got tougher sentences...."
Always the Republicans. Lefist Reason never says anything bad about Democrats. Ever.
So sad.
Zzzz
So, BOTH sides. Both parties. The worst instincts of... etc.
As I count it, only 2 Democrats didn't vote for this.
I think less than 30 of the 211 Republicans in the house and 50 in the senate voted for this bill.
Tell me again about BOTH sides here?
No shit. Why mention Republicans at all? The focus should be on Democrats only.
Yawn
Zzzz *snore*
It's worth mentioning the Republicans for two reasons.
1) The Democrats couldn't have passed it without Republican help.
and,
2) Republicans in the leadership supported it. Not just nobody's who were planning on retiring anyway.
They saw a disastrous midterm election for the Democrats looming, and figured that made a betrayal politically survivable. But that wouldn't have mattered if they hadn't already WANTED to betray us on this issue.
We must never forget this: The (current) Republican leadership are NOT our allies on this topic. They WILL betray us any time they think they can get away with it.
Democrats do kinda run both Houses and the WH. They seem abnormally responsible for legislation.
C'mon Reason! You know the rules!
If you criticize Republicans then YOU'RE LEFTIST SCUM THAT NEEDS TO DIE!
If you criticize both then BOAF SIDEZ YOU'RE LEFTIST SCUM THAT NEEDS TO DIE!
If you criticize Democrats only then you're rational and thoughtful.
Poor, poor, pitiful sarcasmic.
I think he may have finally gone around the bend. I’m expecting more use of “clinger” shortly.
I only use that word to describe turds stuck in taint.
Buy a bidet you filthy animal.
Heard that in the voice of Ralph Foody, from *Home Alone*.
Zzzz
Well they HAD to do something. Here it is. Be disgusted.
No, Heller is an outlier and does not define constitutionality. It will be overturned when the will of American voters finally get control of the SC again, as the constitution intends. Scalia's definition was made up out of whole cloth, not the over 200 years of precedent he decided to trash.
when the will of American voters finally get control of the SC again,
Not how it works
I wonder what he thought "as the constitution intends" means. It's not even word salad.
Joe is into "democracy" like the CCP is into democracy.
The president appoints SC nominees, obviously intended to make the court represent general - not specific will. This court does not represent that as the majority were either appointed by loser presidents or were placed in seats stolen from winners of the presidency and given to a 2 time loser of the vote.
Your brain is addled, you old, demented cocksucker.
Of course it defines Constitutionality. Since Marlborough v Madison, that is a Supreme Court decision means.
And I will challenge you to cite the Supreme Court cases that Heller overturned. I don’t think that you will be able to find any. But I will look at what you cite for us here.
US vs Miller specifically and over 200 years of the court not finding an individual right to possess firearms.
Retarded Joe strikes again!
Please cite to the page in Miller. Not my memory of the case at all. Besides, not finding the right to keep and bear arms to be an individual right is irrelevant, if the Supreme Court had never found the opposite, that it specifically wasn’t an individual right. My understanding and reading of Heller is that it was the first time, in over 220 years, that the Court had made a legal determination on this point, and they determined that, of course, it was an individual right.
The contrary is nonsensical. Who were the ratifiers of the 2nd Amdt trying to protect with it, if not individuals? The federal government? The 1st and 3rd-10th Amdts in the Bill of. Rights were adopted in order to protect against the federal government, while the 2nd Amdt was included to protect it? The other 1st-8th Amdts clearly are aimed at protecting individuals against the government - why isn’t the 2nd?
What had been confusing had been the Militia Clause. The Heller Court pointed out the obvious - under the usage at the time of adoption, and continuing to date, it was precatory. That is now the law of the land. That meant that it was merely a justification for the operative clause (that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed [by the federal government]). Because it was precatory, it was never really relevant or limiting to the operative clause. This had been understood by most Americans over the previous two centuries, but was used by certain activist lower courts to justify infringements of the 2nd Amdt by these courts, and the Heller Court merely made that explicit - that these lower courts were wrong, and it was an individual right.
Fuck off and die, asshole.
The government that cannot deport 20M illegals will somehow seize over 300M guns?
Hold on to that.
And good luck having cops actually go and seize them. A few corpses will reduce the number of volunteers.
>>"And time is of the essence. Lives will be saved … we are doing something consequential.
three strikes for Brandon.
If only there were an organization in America dedicated to defending civil liberties. They could encourage a union of (D)s and (R)s who could get this kind of legislation killed in committee.
Gun nuts are among my favorite culture war casualties.
I look forward to watching them learn -- with anti-abortion absolutists, white nationalist immigrant-haters, and others -- the consequences of tying one's political prospects to the losing (and lesser) side of a culture war in America.
A2, asshole bigot. Read it and weep, loser.
Also, fuck off and die.
Better get those darkies in line (or do some more election fortification), or you might be the one learning to grovel.
Pretty much every federal law on the books violates our civil liberties.
All we have to do is prohibit government from initiating force.
“Government is what we do together “
“Government is what we *fuck up* together.”
The knuckle-dragging neanderthals at Reason™ really need to get their shit together here.. The collectivized term 'Bi-partisan' is both degrading and insulting. 'Partisan-fluid' is a much more.. apt description for these opportunistic pricks. And for Christ's sake, get the pronouns right.. (D/R/and I)
Only in America is the freedom to own a gun more important than other people's freedom to, oh I don't know, live.
Banning guns may well kill people, too. Never considered that, huh?
Guns protect peoples lives from those that think others have no right to live, douche bag.
I heard a line somewhere, maybe from a commentor here, that republicans cling to their guns to protect themselves from democrats and every policy democrats promote justifies that belief over and over again.
If democrats were so worried republicans will kill them with their guns, maybe they should be armed, too.
So do the federal laws that ban my bearing biological and chemical arms - yet I don't see you whining like little Biotches about the tyranny that I am being subjected to.