Kelly Roskam of the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions discusses a Supreme Court case that will decide if a federal law prohibiting possession of firearms by people subject to domestic violence protection orders is constitutional

  • AnalogyAddict@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Property isn't property. You don't have to go through a background check to buy a package of socks. You don't have to pay annual taxes in order to continue to own your underwear. You don't register your toothbrush, nor need a license to mow your lawn.

    Society has already decided certain forms of property are treated differently than others.

    • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      You don’t have to go through a background check to buy a firearm in most parts of the US (although you do to purchase a firearm from a dealer; private sales are largely legal).

      Aside from NFA items, you shouldn't be paying a tax to own firearms, period. Can you imagine paying a tax to be allowed to go to church, or to abstain from going to church? Or, say, to vote?

      You don't need to register a firearm in most places in the US. (Nor should you!)

      You don't need a license to own a firearm in most places in the US. (Nor should you!)

      The fact that society has, in some places, decided that the constitution shouldn't apply to them, is not a good answer.