Susan Liebell, a political science professor at Saint Joseph’s University in Philadelphia, said that gun control provisions with large amounts of popular support are unlikely to advance in the current political environment.
“The way this should play out politically is that senators and representatives would be punished in elections because they don’t support the kind of gun safety laws that Americans want,” Liebell said. “However, there’s no evidence that Americans are willing to vote on gun safety the way they’re willing to vote on the economy.”
Liebell also pointed out that the conservative legal movement spent much of the last four decades building the Supreme Court majority that led to the Bruen decision, one that is not likely to go away anytime soon.
“We’re not really talking about history, we’re not really talking about the original interpretation of the Second Amendment, we’re talking about the number of votes that you have on the Supreme Court,” Liebell said.
— Michael Macagnone in Court rulings wipe out gun laws in wake of Supreme Court decision
The Left sees all branches of government as part of the Legislature.
They don’t recognize any sort of moral authority other than power. That means they’ll use whatever means necessary to achieve what they want.
“I say to the candidates do whatever you have to do, just win baby” -Nancy Pelosi
“Lose with dignity.” -Republicans (old guard)
RE: “susan liebell, a political science professor at Saint Joseph’s University in Philadelphia, said that gun control provisions with large amounts of popular support are unlikely to advance in the current political environment.”
Without a doubt the sneaky fraulein susan lie-bell is plastering words like “safety” and “provisions” on Gun Control in an effort to sell it to gullible useful idiots prone to consume sugarcoated poo.
Now if we look at what susan lie-bell is saying based on the confirmed history of Gun Control the interpetation of her spew is: “You Jews and Cotten Picking n-words can rest easy knowing Gun Control will be there to protect you.”
At least she left out “common sense” That phrase always makes me hurl chunks of disgust.
Common Sense tells me that anyone who uses that phrase while trying to push anti-gun bullshit “is trying to sell it to gullible useful idiots prone to consume sugarcoated poo”
“The Left sees all branches of government as part of the Legislature”
the left sees all branches of government as theirs.
‘…the kind of gun safety laws that Americans want…’
You mean constitutional carry and national reciprocity?
Don’t forget removing short barreled rifles and shotguns, plus silencers from the NFA!
Don’t scare the other side with the Silencer term; they only Suppress the Noise. Why do suppressors cost so much money? Do you think they would be less if they were not an NFA item requiring the tax stamp?
At least $200 less.
If they were available over-the-counter, they would likely cost half the price they are going for now.
The higher end ones would probably be 200 less but the low to mid quality ones that would flood the market could possibly be under 200.
You bet they would.
Part of the reasons cans can be so expensive (especially centerfire rifle cans) is (1) given that they are such a PITA to get, they are made to last out of things like titanium, and (2) the whole tax stamp shuffle suppresses demand, and so you don’t get the economies of scale you would with greater production.
Get rid of the tax stamp / NFA requirements, and you’d see aluminum cans that would only be good for a couple of hundred shots but priced so cheap that people would treat them as a consumable. And DIY cans (a-la the “solvent trap” kits and oil filter adapters) would be ubiquitous.
Imagine someone like Primary Arms or PSA being able to sell cans the same way they sell BCG’s. I bet you’d see them offering under $100 cans with replaceable baffles within weeks.
Or just remove the NFA.
“…remove the NFA.”
It’s just not going to happen with select-fire.
Now that the 3-D printing Genie is out of the bottle, machine guns will be associated with gang-bangers and Glocks, and the Leftist Scum ™ will gin-up the fear and hate with their lap-dogs in the media.
I’m beginning to doubt we may even get the registry re-opened again, but I’ve been wrong before…
Don’t despair just yet. I foresee a successful challenge to the Hughes Amendment under Bruen. (I’ll go further and predict it will be filed in NDTx, Fort Worth division, where it will go to either O’Connor or Pittman.)
If it succeeds, everyone and their cat will be Form 1’ing DIY DIAS’s, or perhaps even electronic FCG’s.
I can envision an inexpensive electronic FCG (using technology not available when the registry was closed) that is a dumb semi-auto trigger normally (or if the electronics fail), but when engaged an electronically-controlled servo allows you to select your rate of fire and the number of rounds you want to fire in burst mode, or of course just keep it pulled and it keeps firing until you run out of ammo.)
From the nuts and bolts aspect there’s just not much of an advantage to full auto in an individual arm, much more practical from a crew serviced platform. So on one hand I’m sort of OK with that restriction, at least as far as the existence of the NFA goes. The registry should be reopened though. On the other hand, under the original intent of the 2nd Amendment, you were free to own your own warship, so I don’t see how many aspect of the NFA is constitutional. Bottom line is that the art of politics is the art of compromise, so one step at a time.
As far as Select Fire, you are 100% correct. The only thing practical about full auto, if you can call it practical is that it’s fun. If you want to have fun shooting, no doubt full auto is a kick in the butt. As far as self-defense and the actual practicality of full auto, they aren’t practical at all.
In combat they have narrow use, on the streets, they are of virtually no use and are very impractical.
Should I be able to own one? Damn straight!
Someone asked me why I want this stuff, the answer is because I get off on it and it pisses off the left. Half the shit I own is just to thumb my nose at the gun hating left and I do that with glee.
MLee, the fun’s all over when it comes time to order more ammo.
Sure, if you’ve got the budget, have at it. But if we’re only talking about the legal hoops you have to jump through in order to have some fun, then the NFA, with the exception of the closing of the registry, is not a significant restriction. Then again, I remember what a thrill it was doing a 15 round mag dump at the range the first time. That thrill quickly diminishes though. Same could be said for my speed fix that in my (relative) youth I attempted to fix with insanely fast motorcycles. I eventually came to the conclusion that at some point top fuel drag racers must look at the mechanic and say, ‘I don’t know, it feels kind of slow.’ about a vehicle capable of sub 4 second quarter miles. But yes, I would certainly put experiencing flipping the giggle switch on a full auto on my bucket list. Just once, anyway.
@MLee: “In combat they have narrow use, on the streets, they are of virtually no use and are very impractical.”
Respectfully disagree. A good support by fire (SBF) position allows maneuvering forces to cover ground on a dug in defensive position under the cover of suppressive fires. Then there’s also the mounted (in some cases, automated) coaxial machineguns on up-armored/armored vehicles that provide a mobile SBF position for any dismounts during convoys and security patrols. And that’s without getting into the rockets & guns combo for any of the myriad close air support platforms during a troops in contact situation. Suppressing fires is absolutely critical as part of the armed overwatch (and certainly the overmatch) concepts in both offensive and defensive combat operations.
“In combat they have narrow use”
the left views street combat as legitimate politics. it always has.
Eliminate the NFA, GCA of ’68, and other gun elimination acts. Then remove the ATF’s power to control firearms, period. I am hoping that SCOTUS rams Bruen down their throats.
AMEN AMEN AMEN AND AMEN! Do I hear an “AMEN”?
And mail order full auto.
My drivers license lets me operate a vehicle in all 50 states. In fact it’s good for 6 months in Canada and Mexico too. Were it up to me I’d be telling True-Doh and Obrador to suck it up buttercup. Americans will be driving in your country armed or we start adding stars to the flag.
Trade – il Justin Trudeo can have Puerto Rico. We will take Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba
Deal.
Absolutely, positively, supercalifragilisticexpelidociously correct! National Reciprocity and elimination of ALL State, County and Local Infringements currently imposed.
The only gun free zones should have armed guards and metal detectors and a place to check in your weapon and pick it back up on your way out. No more pernicious ‘helpless victims’ signs on the wall.
That’s as bad as “America Shops At Sears”
No they didn’t.
They used to. That damn catalog had *everything*, especially back in the early 1900s…
Miss the old school general hardware stores. You could buy saddles, wood heaters, fencing, troughs, clothes, nails, guns and ammo etc.
““However, there’s no evidence that Americans are willing to vote on gun safety the way they’re willing to vote on the economy.”
If you can’t feed yer chillin’, nothing else much matters. For all his bombast and crassness, Clinton’s advisor James Carville hit the nail on the head.
It’s the economy, stupid.
If I can’t PROTECT my family nothing else much matters. Protection includes feeding them…my gats are safe enough.
““We’re not really talking about history, we’re not really talking about the original interpretation of the Second Amendment, we’re talking about the number of votes that you have on the Supreme Court,” Liebell said.”
Well, yes, you stupid wench, we really are talking about the original Second Amendment. Shall not be infringed, etc. Personal right to self defense, personal right to bear arms, personal right to own the weapons that one can afford, or inherits, or is gifted. Oh yeah, gifted. Over the milennia, many, many, many young men have gone off to war who couldn’t afford so much as a dagger, but were gifted the weapons they needed by family, village, or whoever.
Yes, yes, yes, you stupid lying wench. It is all about the Second Amendment. If you were literate, you would understand that.
And, yes, a lot of voters understand that. The DNC and their bedfellows are teaching that lesson to them in liberal cities around the nation. When seconds count, the police are only minutes away.
Paul,
I think you misunderstood her out of context. Basically; She is talking about the political reality, in terms of elections, of what voters really vote for AND that even in the end the SCOTUS cards are stacked against the gun grabbers even if they did manage to prevail in November.
No matter what the second amendment says… what really hurts the gun grabber politicians is being booted out of office, or denied office, by losing elections.
Interpretation is the magic word in her essay.
More of that “our positions are sooo popular with the people we’d lose our jobs if we act on them” nonsense.
Just like all their other popular ideas with broad support they have to deny and hide from the same people that broadly support those ideas.
What has it done? Make it worse for gun owners in the blue states
Only temporarily. People are filing lawsuits left and right over their rights being denied and thanks to Bruin they’re often winning hands-down. It’s going to take time (but shouldn’t) but with enough lawsuits and people being voted out we will start to see better changes.
When people start to talk about massacres, I like to bring up Child Trafficking. Way more children are taken from people around the world, than are massacred. And who is behind the trafficking networks ? ? ? People they don’t want to admit, or are afraid to believe could be.
The Mexican cartels now make much more money from human trafficking than they do from drugs. This includes modern day slavery, sex slaves, and indentured servitude. Democrats are making slavery great again, kind of like they did in the Middle East. Where are all of those Handmaid’s Tale cosplayers? *Crickets*
Slavery is a bit of a tradition with the Democrats, and especially the usage rights on that property.
Child trafficking is a part of their game. Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell go to prison. What about their clients? Why are there no other arrests?
Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell were the ‘sacrifice flavor’ of choice. The actual connections info for the others died with Epstein and he didn’t spill it.
Maxwell though… she might have something but she’s not coming out with it either or coming out with anything that’s incriminating enough. The one girl, she settled with Andrew so she’s not going further either. The other girls aren’t coming out with anything, yet.
But the actual connections that would have led to others were with Epstein and he didn’t spill the beans and any other accusations would just be she-said-he-said without showing a connection to procurement by Epstein. Even if Maxwell did come out with something its just going to be what she said as there is nothing that’s not already known with the connection to Epstein but he died so there is nothing to back it up. But something could happen so…
I don’t think we’ve seen the end of the drama with Maxwell, et al. Too many people involved to keep too many secrets so secret for so long. Goes to show though who all must REALLY be on that list as most, if not all, of them had the funds to pay the exorbitant “fees” to keep folks quiet. I’m sure some blackmailing is still going on. IMHO … “Randy Andy” should’ve threw in the towel years ago, cut a special deal with his mom Queen Liz, and stayed with Koo Stark decades ago regardless of the controversy (look her up – she’s still not bad for her age).
Payoffs and the fear of the ones you love being Epsteined do wonders for keeping mouths shut.
Maxwell probably has someone she cares about who’s life will be cut short if she talks.
“led to some pretty bizarre results,”
I believe that following the 2nd A to the letter should not and is not “bizarre”.
Only a communist would believe that IMO.
they do. to them, anything they don’t want is a violation of the natural world order. no joke.
RINO(s), leftists, liberals, and other seditious gun haters should be punished for not supporting and/or ding away with our constitutional rights. This goes for eroding our national sovereignty with the UN and otherwise.
Agreed! There has to be consequences. We can’t rely on the ignorant and misinformed voters to kick them out. The Puppet Admin has been ignoring immigration laws to implement their open border strategy. Yet, they’re ready to enforce laws to keep the locals from building border barriers. They should be impeached for that, at a minimum. Future (most likely) House Leader McCarthy has already said he has no interest in impeaching anyone. He wants a return to business as usual. He’s another worthless RINO.
Why they admire China and the CCP. The bureaucracy and the military don’t belong to the country or the people. They belong to the party and serve to do the party’s will.
So how do we weed out RINOs in the primaries, and even more importantly, create a more R-friendly non-RINO culture in metropolitan areas?
“So how do we weed out RINOs in the primaries, and even more importantly, create a more R-friendly non-RINO culture in metropolitan areas?”
You don’t. You just delay the inevitable. This is how great nations die.
“The candle burns at both ends;
It will not last the night;
But ah, my foes, and oh, my friends –
It gives a lovely light.”
I don’t know of fool-proof method to get them gone before they work in to office but following them CLOSELY (meetings, dinners, press interviews, etc.,) usually helps. This works best when using a small group of people having the same focus but can monitor different candidates.
Activist groups, (NRA, FPC, NAGR, etc.,) mail out questionnaires to be answered and sent in. These are often published and you can monitor those. Always monitor groups OUTSIDE of firearms as that is where the two-faced politicians get caught.
Last we need to review our procedures, laws, etc., regarding recalling candidates and get legislation passed to make it easier for this to be done. Texas is one state that most definitely needs to visit this and ASAP.
I also look at the possibility of candidates refusing election results when presented with obvious and reasonable evidence of voter and vote fraud. Those willing to go along with recounts and possibly run-off elections when they have the highest votes typically SHOULD be less likely to be RINO(s).
“We’ve analyzed their attack, sir, and there is a danger.” – Star Wars (1977)
The gun-haters are not stupid. Whether or not Bruen reflects the original intent of the authors of the Second Amendment is irrelevant. “We” know it does. “They” don’t care one way or the other.
They’ve already had MUCH success over the years flaunting both the Second Amendment and subsequent court rulings such as Heller and McDonald, by simply weaponizing gun-hating, activist judges and justices on various Local, State, and Federal courts.
Even with Bruen solidly entrenched, THEY know it will always be far easier to replace judges and justices with new ones who will rule THEIR WAY, than it would ever be to amend the US Constitution legally.
This fight will never be over. It will simply move to the political arena, where those who select judges and justices are chosen over the long run. THAT is where our battle ultimately lies.
excellent post. though perhaps it might be more efficient to take the battle to THEM.
FROM MY COLD DEAD HAND!
If I can be honest, I support common sense gun laws such as keeping firearms out of the hands of people who are a menace to society, the thing about that is how do we determine who is fit to have them as America has shown in the past the racist agenda, so unless we have a clear cut and concise way that doesn’t interfere in ANYONE’S civil rights it’s a slippery slope. Let’s go back to the 1930s (before the NFA) when it comes to firearms so we can get stuff mailed to our homes, I believe some type of training would be require hell a basic safety course and I’m saying that because if you taken the course and still chose to be unsafe then because of your stupidity, you need to be punished. That’s about all I can think of. Hell I don’t care if you smoke weed, get drunk, or what not. Self defense don’t stop just because you’re under the influence of something, you better be able to think clearly regardless of your state
“how do we determine who is fit”
Presumption of innocence until proven guilty.
indeed some kind of training SHOULD be required. in the context of the 2nd, simple acculturation and militia duty sees to that, but those are few and far between now. in these times gun ed should be a high school class right alongside drivers ed, and be treated the same way.
“indeed some kind of training SHOULD be required. ”
Who do you suspect would be in charge of determining what “training” means? Would it be universal, or subject to local government agents? Who would be able to change the details? Which other natural, human and civil rights should be subject to mandatory training and certification permitting a person to exercise those rights?
“in charge of training”
up to me, I’d make it the local sherrif.
“permitting a person to exercise those rights”
(smile) exercise of a right that involves deadly hazard to others requires respect for OTHERS rights too. thus training.
“However, there’s no evidence that Americans are willing to vote on gun safety the way they’re willing to vote on the economy.”
This statement implies that Americans, on the whole, occasionally want gun control. This is a total fabrication – Americans have never voted for gun control in any significant numbers.
Americans love their rights and freedoms. Guns are a large part of exercising those rights.
Liebell is just another Constitution denier, and is utterly worthless.
Original interpretation of the second amendment.
I vote for that.
“original interpretation of the second amendment”
which would require active militia duty. “well-regulated” meant well-trained, well-practiced, well-drilled, well-disciplined, and well-led.
which I’m all for.
Democracy is a bitch, when it doesn’t go your way. Majority rule is a bitch, when it doesn’t go your way.
As I have been saying for so long…”If you don’t agree with me, in every detail, you shouldn’t be allowed to vote, or do anything else.”
that dynamic is supposed to be addressed by limited federal powers, limited state powers, and individual property rights. all conducted within a common assumed culture of course.
“that dynamic is supposed to be addressed by limited federal powers, limited state powers,”
Prior to the 14th Amendment, the federal government was limited, while the States retained all the other powers, which, as the 9th and 10th Amendments declare, are not limited.
true and very good point. but since adoption the bill of rights (and other concepts) has been expanded to include restrictions on state powers, and it’s unlikely anyone will be willing to back off from that. the whole idea is limited government consistent with necessary order allowing for local variations to accommodate varying cultures.
@Gov. William J Le Petomane
“So on one hand I’m sort of OK with that restriction, at least as far as the existence of the NFA goes.”
Gov….that reads as, “I believe in the Second Amendment, but…”
Is that intentional? Controlling firearms you are not interested in?
“I believe in the Second Amendment, but…”
if you believe in the second amendment, then you believe in a well-regulated militia – which most modern rightists reject out of hand.
“if you believe in the second amendment, then you believe in a well-regulated militia – which most modern rightists reject out of hand.”
You misapprehend the sequence of events.
First, the founders answered the question of who makes up the militia (“the people”).
Second, obtaining, and possessing firearm equivalency between individuals and a standing army is the core of a militia.
Third, a regulated militia is not the foundation of a militia. (read the founders on the subject).
Fourth, a militia without the members having armament is a social club.
You are trying the old, worn-out, argument that the Second Amendment protects a militia. Yet, the founders were clear that it is the people who are protected, not the militia.
“the founders were clear that it is the people who are protected”
in order to participate in a militia. a well-regulated militia.
“old, worn-out”
tried and true.
This broad is a posterchild for Prog.
https://directory.sju.edu/susan-liebell
Good bet that rack has been around.
1 Question for the gun controllers/disarmament crowd. Exactly what law, regulation, ban, etc would actually have the claimed effect of disarming those who are of criminal mindset?
If someone has decided to commit murder, exactly what law will prevent them from doing so?
Another question. What difference does it make if someone uses a firearm, a knife, or a 5 gallon gas can and a road flare? Why the fixation on the implement used rather than the violent act?
We tried to prohibit alcohol a century ago. All that really did was make the Mafia a lot of money supplying people with booze. If there is a demand for something, whether it be booze, drugs, guns, or even sex, someone will find a way to get it and someone will find a way to supply it, legally or not.
Unless and until we as a society choose to deal with those who commit the violence, and stop fixating on the implement used, nothing will change. And deal with those persons swiftly and harshly. If those who would commit acts of violence do not fear the possible punishment, they will continue to commit the crimes.
“Exactly what law, regulation, ban, etc would actually have the claimed effect of disarming those who are of criminal mindset?”
you don’t understand your question. by “criminal” they mean “anyone not under our control or working for us.” general criminality advances their goal – that’s why they support it – while citizens with weapons hinders their goal – that’s why they oppose it.
Repeal the NFA.
Full Auto is less accurate, so Full Auto saves lives…
😁👍🏻
(laughing)
“We’re not really talking about history, we’re not really talking about the original interpretation of the Second Amendment”
yes we are. and that’s why they don’t like it, because that history and interpretation don’t allow for their total control of the rest of us.
@rant7
“up to me, I’d make it the local sherrif.”
indeed, a government agent. history has shown the outcomes of sheriffs determining who is fit to bear arms.
“(smile) exercise of a right that involves deadly hazard to others requires respect for OTHERS rights too. thus training.”
Source citation for the “requirement”?
I respect the rights of others by not shooting them for sport; got my training for that from my parents. There is no evidence that training in firearms makes an owner “responsible”, or honoring rights of others. Like the decision to kill innocents, being “responsible” is in the mind of the individual.
“indeed, a government agent”
an elected official. you are supposed to participate with your community in regulating and controlling your government – but the modern right doesn’t want community, they want to operate solely on their own personal recognizance and everyone else is just irrelevant.
“Source citation?”
common sense to anyone who sees beyond themselves.
“I”
exactly. who cares about anyone else?
“Gun control” and gun safety are vastly different things.
yes. the ones pushing gun control don’t want safety, they want control.
As far as I’m concerned, Bruen didn’t go far enough. Repeal the NFA, GCA and all subsequent legislation. Exhumed Hughes and shove his Amendment up his rotten arse where it belongs.
The Communist Democrats will shove gun control through after they steal the mid-terms. At this point, they are merely bull horning to the American public what they plan on doing after Novembre.
Comments are closed.