It is the claim of yourself, and only yourself, that the Lopez ruling did nothing to affect the Wickard decision, despite it being explained that Lopez specified that interstate commerce cannot be used as a justification by the federal government to regulate and restrict firearms. The onus is now upon yourself to actually prove that Lopez does not actually say what it says, and that Wickard authorizes the federal government to regulate and restrict firearms in whatever manner it deems fit.
No your claim is completely false. Support your claim with evidence. It is laughable as we have federal gun restrictions now. You do make me laugh though. Lol
you are not being truthful in that claim registration laws specifically cannot be applied to criminals
that's horsecrap given retail sales are essentially registered to the first retail buyer so you are wrong-yet again
so how are you going to get them registered? the more likely they are to be used by criminals the less likely they are to be registered You need to actually understand how criminals work before spouting nonsense that is ignorant of the real world
"He took leave of his senses, and went down Mexico way, for a quickie Divorce from Reality, a long long time ago." Excerpt; The long road to Blatherscite. Author: Me.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/United-States-v-Lopez On November 8, 1994, the case was argued before the Supreme Court, which affirmed the order of the Fifth Circuit. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice William Rehnquist explained that the Gun-Free School Zones Act was neither a regulation of the channels of interstate commerce nor an attempt to prohibit interstate transportation of a commodity through those channels. Consequently, he determined that if the act were to withstand judicial scrutiny, it would have to substantially affect interstate commerce. To this end, the government had argued that possession of the gun in a school zone could result in a violent crime that would have the potential to have an impact on the national economy. The government also claimed that the significant cost of insurance associated with violent crime affects the economy, because the expense is spread throughout society. In addition, it contended that the economy is harmed when individuals refuse to travel to areas they believe to be unsafe. The government suggested that the presence of guns in the schools presents a serious threat to the learning environment; this in turn could result in a less-educated citizenry, which would have an obvious adverse impact on the country. The court, however, rejected the government’s arguments. In the majority opinion, Rehnquist pointed out that “if we were to accept the Government’s arguments, we are hard pressed to posit any activity by an individual that Congress is without power to regulate.” He noted that under the Constitution, Congress does not have the authority to enact virtually any type of legislation that it wishes. Regardless of how broadly one might seek to construe the Gun-Free School Zones Act’s terms, the court found that it was a criminal statute and had nothing to do with interstate commerce or economic activity. The Supreme Court thus affirmed the ruling of the Fifth Circuit and struck down the act as an impermissible exercise of congressional power under the commerce clause. As far as regulating firearms is concerned, Wickard is confirmed as a dead issue. Which were not implemented on the basis of the federal government doing such for the express purpose of regulating interstate commerce.
if its illegal to sell certain guns or gun accessories, and millions of stores no longer sell them, that affects the availability of such things for even criminals
meanwhile you oppose ex-felons, Permanent Residents, and legal aliens being able to possess guns in the USA to protect themselves. so much for "freedom".
such nonsense will deprive honest people of them far more readily than it will deny criminals do you think its proper to disarm or limit millions of honest people in the hope it might prevent few criminals from getting something?
