How the NRA evolved from backing a 1934 ban on machine guns to blocking nearly all firearm restrictions today

  The mass shootings at a Buffalo, New York supermarket and an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, just 10 days apart, are stirring the now-familiar national debate over guns seen after the tragic 2012 and 2018 school shootings in Newtown, Connecticut, and Parkland, Florida.

  Inevitably, if also understandably, many Americans are blaming the National Rifle Association for thwarting stronger gun laws that might have prevented these two recent tragedies and many others. And despite the proximity in time and location to the Texas shooting, the NRA is proceeding with its plans to hold its annual convention in Houston on May 27-29, 2022. The featured speakers include former President Donald Trump and Sen. Ted Cruz, a Texas Republican.

Why the Second Amendment protects a ‘well-regulated militia’ but not a private citizen militia

  When a federal judge in California struck down the state’s 32-year-old ban on assault weapons in early June 2021, he added a volatile new issue to the gun-rights debate.

  The ruling, by U.S. District Court Judge Roger Benitez, does not take effect immediately, because California has 30 days to appeal the rejection of its assault weapons ban. Most coverage has focused on Benitez’s provocative analogy between an AR-15 and a Swiss army knife. But the case raises troubling questions about the meaning and proper role of “militias” under the Second Amendment.

Hank Sanders: Sketches #1689 - The Second Amendment does not apply to Black folk

  The Second Amendment does not apply to Black folk. I knew that a long time ago. Alabama, where I live, is a strong Second Amendment state. It is an open-carry state. It has some of the most rigorous pro-gun laws in these United States. But I know that the Second Amendment does not apply to Black folk.

  I know that from current manifestations. I know that from recent history. I know that from the long history stretching way back beyond the founding of the country.

  I am convinced, and I stand to be corrected, that I cannot safely carry an open weapon in Alabama in spite of the law. I am a Black man who turned 77 last week. However, if I took a rifle or a pistol and walked into a Walmart or any other store, I would likely be shot. I don’t have to wave the gun or say anything; I just have to have it and for other people know it.

Background checks violate property rights

  In the early 1990s, I accompanied a friend and his 12-year-old son to a local gun show. My friend wished to purchase a .22 caliber rifle with which to teach his son to shoot safely and effectively. After much browsing, he found one at a reasonable price, one that suited both his needs and those of his son. The seller, a federally licensed firearms dealer, handed my friend an ATF Form 4473 to fill out. When my friend asked him why he had to fill out the form, the dealer answered that he could not purchase the weapon without doing so.

  At this point, I inserted myself into the conversation. I told the dealer that the restriction was not on my friend, who was free to purchase firearms without filling out anything, but upon him. As a dealer, he had accepted a license from the federal government to engage in the business of buying and selling firearms and was thus subject to the terms of that license. One of the terms was that he could not sell them to anyone who didn’t fill out the ATF Form 4473. In addition, the dealer has to keep the form on file for inspection by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (BATF). The same is true for the background check; it is imposed on the dealer as a condition of his license.

Charlottesville shows that states must amend their open-carry laws

  We’ve all seen the pictures from Charlottesville.

  Peaceful protesters being met with men carrying military-style weapons. Many of those unarmed were probably intimidated. I certainly think I would have been.

  What did the scene represent? Were we looking at a clash of grand constitutional values, a clash between the cherished First Amendment right to protest peacefully and the revered Second Amendment right to bear arms? Or were we looking at something much more mundane?

  The answer is the latter. Our Founding Fathers didn’t tie us into a constitutional knot. Our state legislatures, bowing to pressure from groups like the NRA, did so not too many years back.

Ken Paulson: America’s favorite freedom

  What is America’s favorite freedom?  It’s freedom of speech by a wide margin, according to the annual State of the First Amendment survey.

  About 47% of those polled in the First Amendment Center survey said freedom of speech is the most important right, almost five times the number citing second-choice freedom of religion, named by 10%.

Constitutionality of proposed firearms legislation

  Tragic mass shootings in Newtown, Connecticut, and elsewhere have prompted renewed national interest in the federal regulation of firearms. In January 2013 President Barack Obama publicly announced support for three new legislative measures to regulate firearm ownership and sales:

-Banning certain semiautomatic weapons with military-style features—commonly referred to as “assault weapons”—in addition to high-capacity ammunition magazines holding more than 10 rounds

-Requiring background checks on all firearms sales, not just those purchased from federally licensed firearms dealers

-Enhancing penalties for trafficking in firearms

Steve Flowers: Inside the Statehouse: Conservative legislature stays the course

  The 2013 legislative session kicked off last week. There is an old saying that nobody’s life, liberty or property is safe when the legislature is in session. A more accurate description for today in Alabama with a super Republican majority in charge of both chambers would be that no liberal or Democratic interests are safe when this Alabama Legislature is in session.

  It is hard to believe that they are in the third year of their quadrennium. The first two years have resulted in a plethora of conservative legislation. This GOP legislative body cannot be labeled as RINO’s. They are real Republicans. They have been determined to put their conservative stamp on the state. They have indeed left an indelible mark on the Alabama political structure. Lying in the carnage of their march is the once vaunted Alabama Education Association. They have been stampeded and stomped on by this herd of elephants.

Gary Palmer: Don’t look to Washington, look to the states

  In the immediate aftermath of the 2012 elections, many people concluded that the conservative movement was all but lost. But who would have thought that only five weeks after the election, conservatives would be celebrating a landmark victory?

  Following the re-election of President Barack Obama and the Republican embarrassment in the U.S. Senate races no one would have believed that any state would be able to muster support for passage of right-to-work legislation in any state. Yet on December 11th, in spite of fierce opposition from Michigan labor unions, the Michigan State Legislature passed legislation that Gov. Rick Snyder signed making Michigan the 24th right-to-work state.

Cameron Smith: The Constitutional collision between the First and Second Amendments

  Since the tragedy of the Newtown shootings, politicians and pundits have argued tirelessly that either the Second Amendment is inviolable or gun ownership should be further restricted to "legitimate" functions and limited inventories.

  But the issue is about far more than guns. Our country is beginning to witness a head-on collision between the exercise of the First and Second Amendments.

Jacob G. Hornberger: Guns and tyranny

  There are three important things to remember about the Second Amendment. First, it doesn’t give people the right to own guns. Second, it is an implicit acknowledgement that the U.S. government is the biggest threat to the freedom and well-being of the American people. Third, the rationale for enacting the Second Amendment was to ensure that the American citizenry retained the means to violently resist tyranny by the federal government.