4 ms·

> Constitution guarantees the vote to every adult citizen, not just those who are organised or can pay the fee. > we know they suppress turnout among certain p

> Constitution guarantees the vote to every adult citizen, not just those who are organised or can pay the fee. > we know they suppress turnout among certain populations The constitution also guarantees the right to bear arms, wouldn't requiring ID in that case also suppress certain populations exercise of that right?

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> constitution also guarantees the right to bear arms, wouldn't requiring ID in that case also suppress certain populations exercise of that right? One, the meaning of that phrase is much more ambiguous than the right to vote. Two, you can buy a gun without ID at a gun show.
- sickofparadox 2y ago
  "The right to bear arms shall not be infringed" is as unambiguous as "The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude."
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    Do you truly believe the individual right to bear arms was the law, or commonly acknowledged let alone accepted, before WWII?
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - sickofparadox 2y ago
      You could buy bolt action, semi, and even fully automatic firearms, including belt fed machine guns, with no ID out of a catalog and have it delivered to your door before WW2. Acting like the individual right to bear arms didn't exist before Heller is akin to an 8 year old telling me 9/11 was a fictional event. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/54213/54213-h/54213-h.htm https://www.gutenberg.org/files/54213/54213-h/54213-h.htm https://www.ar15.com/media/mediafiles/346339/838C8AF0-140E-4B52-B8F1-CBEC3514ACFA_jpeg-1054643.JPG https://www.ar15.com/media/mediafiles/346339/838C8AF0-140E-4... https://archive.org/details/catalogno12400sear/page/904/mode/2up?view=theater https://archive.org/details/catalogno12400sear/page/904/mode...
      - kasey_junk 2y ago
        Cruikshank pretty much said it didn’t exist in 1876.
        sickofparadox 2y ago
        The Sears catalog did not seem to get the memo, and was not impeded in its distribution for missing it.
        kasey_junk 2y ago
        The mailing of firearms act in 1927 and the national firearms act of 1934 both changed how sears could sell through their catalog. Your example is a good one because Thompson sub machine guns was a frequently cited impetus for the NFA.
- willcipriano 2y ago
  > One, the meaning of that phrase is much more ambiguous than the right to vote. Please elaborate on this ambiguous standard. How "ambiguous" must a right be for it to be gated via ID and fees? > Two, you can buy a gun without ID at a gun show. A common misconception, please stop spreading misinformation. > Generally, all firearms purchases and transfers, including private party transactions and sales at gun shows, must be made through a California licensed dealer under the Dealer’s Record of Sale (DROS) process > As part of the DROS process, the purchaser must present "clear evidence of identity and age" which is defined as a valid, non-expired California Driver's License or Identification Card issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/pubfaqs https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/pubfaqs
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > elaborate on this ambiguous standard It’s been debated at our highest court since the 1970s. > common misconception, please stop spreading misinformation It was true in August where my friend bought a gun with cash at a gun show! (It was in Wyoming.)
    - willcipriano 2y ago
      This story is about California. One would expect it's own laws to be internally consistent.
      - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > story is about California. One would expect it's own laws to be internally consistent Sacramento has made it clear it doesn’t believe in an individual right to arms. It’s internally consistent in the same way Wyoming’s (and most red states’) voter ID + free-for-all gun show rules are.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago

> constitution also guarantees the right to bear arms, wouldn't requiring ID in that case also suppress certain populations exercise of that right? One, the meaning of that phrase is much more ambiguous than the right to vote. Two, you can buy a gun without ID at a gun show.

sickofparadox 2y ago
"The right to bear arms shall not be infringed" is as unambiguous as "The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude."
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  Do you truly believe the individual right to bear arms was the law, or commonly acknowledged let alone accepted, before WWII?
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - sickofparadox 2y ago
    You could buy bolt action, semi, and even fully automatic firearms, including belt fed machine guns, with no ID out of a catalog and have it delivered to your door before WW2. Acting like the individual right to bear arms didn't exist before Heller is akin to an 8 year old telling me 9/11 was a fictional event. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/54213/54213-h/54213-h.htm https://www.gutenberg.org/files/54213/54213-h/54213-h.htm https://www.ar15.com/media/mediafiles/346339/838C8AF0-140E-4B52-B8F1-CBEC3514ACFA_jpeg-1054643.JPG https://www.ar15.com/media/mediafiles/346339/838C8AF0-140E-4... https://archive.org/details/catalogno12400sear/page/904/mode/2up?view=theater https://archive.org/details/catalogno12400sear/page/904/mode...
    - kasey_junk 2y ago
      Cruikshank pretty much said it didn’t exist in 1876.
      - sickofparadox 2y ago
        The Sears catalog did not seem to get the memo, and was not impeded in its distribution for missing it.
        kasey_junk 2y ago
        The mailing of firearms act in 1927 and the national firearms act of 1934 both changed how sears could sell through their catalog. Your example is a good one because Thompson sub machine guns was a frequently cited impetus for the NFA.
willcipriano 2y ago
> One, the meaning of that phrase is much more ambiguous than the right to vote. Please elaborate on this ambiguous standard. How "ambiguous" must a right be for it to be gated via ID and fees? > Two, you can buy a gun without ID at a gun show. A common misconception, please stop spreading misinformation. > Generally, all firearms purchases and transfers, including private party transactions and sales at gun shows, must be made through a California licensed dealer under the Dealer’s Record of Sale (DROS) process > As part of the DROS process, the purchaser must present "clear evidence of identity and age" which is defined as a valid, non-expired California Driver's License or Identification Card issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/pubfaqs https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/pubfaqs
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > elaborate on this ambiguous standard It’s been debated at our highest court since the 1970s. > common misconception, please stop spreading misinformation It was true in August where my friend bought a gun with cash at a gun show! (It was in Wyoming.)
  - willcipriano 2y ago
    This story is about California. One would expect it's own laws to be internally consistent.
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > story is about California. One would expect it's own laws to be internally consistent Sacramento has made it clear it doesn’t believe in an individual right to arms. It’s internally consistent in the same way Wyoming’s (and most red states’) voter ID + free-for-all gun show rules are.