Comments by "0IIIIII" (@0IIIIII) on "AP Explains: Hawaii loosens strict weapons laws after U.S. Supreme Court ruling" video.

Because the 2nd Amendment says the right to bear arms shall not be infringed. It doesn’t say, you can always open or concealed carry no matter what. Gun control is not incompatible with the 2nd Amendment; you can restrict guns without infringing on the right to bear them. It’s been done for decades now.
6
Supreme Court has ruled multiple times that gun control does not necessarily “infringe” per the Second Amendment, the right to bear arms. Put another way, you can restrict guns, and other weapons, in a way that doesn’t infringe on the right to bear them.
4
@Ryan_Christopher what about Alaska?
4
@jameswilson313 you should know that while the 2nd Amendment guarantees the right to bear arms, it doesn’t forbid all gun control. You can restrict guns without banning them.
2
The actual answer is, gun control doesn’t always violate the 2nd Amendment. Laws restricting guns and other weapons are often not considered “infringing” per the language of the 2nd Amendment. Meaning, the gun control you may have is still permissible because while it limits bearing arms, it doesn’t infringe it fully.
1
@alvinrodigues6567 well, the courts don’t agree
1
@davidbat6002 the answer is no, it doesn’t. And this real life sidewalk example is common. Even the First Amendment we all know is NOT unfettered free speech without restrictions.
1
Alternatively, courts have consistently upheld gun control, including the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, as Constitutional because, it was argued, restricting weapons doesn’t always infringe your right to bear them in general. You can restrict arms without rising to the level of infringement
1
@5400bowen legal experts do not agree with you
1
@oldmanghost219 yep so I was correct
1
@13ghosts31 this is because the 2nd Amendment doesn’t forbid gun control. It just means that, whatever gun control you do have, cannot rise to the level of “infringing” the 2nd Amendment.
1
@UnsafeCoyote what about the Federal Assault Weapons Ban from 1994? 10 years before it was allowed to lapse, and not a single ruling that it violated the 2nd Amendment.
1
@UnsafeCoyote what about the Federal Assault Weapons Ban from 1994? 10 years before it was allowed to lapse, and not a single ruling that it violated the 2nd Amendment.
1
@13ghosts31 the Democrats did it back in 1994 it’s not that hard. They can qualify it by caliber, fire rate, magazine size, stopping power, plenty of countries do so too, we can easily copy them. This argument that it’s impossible or vain doesn’t hold up to scrutiny
1
@13ghosts31 we could easily copy the laws of say, Japan, which has the issue easily resolved. Ban anything that is any combination of concealable, automatic, semiautomatic, with power over a certain amount, all handguns, all rifles, all shotguns.
1
@13ghosts31 firstly, Japan does indeed have a Constitution. Secondly, whether they do or don’t is irrelevant. Written laws can be copied or adapted.
1