The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post

MLeake · June 18, 2011, 03:55 PM

Eghad, in the example cited, the only reason NY guy couldn't make the purchase is because of Federal regulation of interstate handgun sales... which, while I will obey the law, I still feel are BS and should be found unconstitutional.

That's one of the things I meant about future potential for SAF to attack various aspects of GCA. If the right to firearms is not supposed to be infringed, then how is it considered ok to say otherwise-eligible persons can only buy in their home state? (I believe there's a suit about that right now, because citizens in DC can't actually buy anywhere; there was one (1) FFL in DC, according to the article I read, and he was using his monopoly to charge outrageous fees.)

June 18, 2011, 03:55 PM	#64
MLeake Senior Member Join Date: November 15, 2007 Location: Outside KC, MO Posts: 10,128	Eghad, in the example cited, the only reason NY guy couldn't make the purchase is because of Federal regulation of interstate handgun sales... which, while I will obey the law, I still feel are BS and should be found unconstitutional. That's one of the things I meant about future potential for SAF to attack various aspects of GCA. If the right to firearms is not supposed to be infringed, then how is it considered ok to say otherwise-eligible persons can only buy in their home state? (I believe there's a suit about that right now, because citizens in DC can't actually buy anywhere; there was one (1) FFL in DC, according to the article I read, and he was using his monopoly to charge outrageous fees.)