Comments on: The DOJ’s New 2A Rights Section’s First Target Should Be States That Require Permits to Buy Guns

By: LKB

LKB — Fri, 12 Dec 2025 21:33:17 +0000

Imagine if officials in a city passed laws that explicitly barred Blacks / Asians / Jews / etc. from owning real estate in that city (i.e., a deliberate, explicit 14th Amendment violation). Does anyone doubt that besides getting that law immediately set aside, DoJ would not hesitate to go after the city officials involved, personally, for charges of conspiracy to violate civil rights (of which they would be pretty clearly guilty)?

Now do the Second Amendment. Whether they are city officials in Phily, state officials in NY, Illinois, or California, or judges in Hawaii, why is an intentional, explicit refusal to abide by Bruen not a deliberate,, unlawful effort to deprive citizens of clearly established civil rights?

Bankrupt and/or incarcerate a few of these folks, and watch how fast this kind of virtue signaling “resistance” comes to a screeching halt.

By: Dude

Dude — Fri, 12 Dec 2025 14:22:02 +0000

In reply to Void. Excessive regulations beget corruption. NYC is a fine example.

By: Nanashi

Nanashi — Fri, 12 Dec 2025 01:21:49 +0000

How about Jeffery Bodell and Lon Horiuchi?

By: A Question, I Haz

A Question, I Haz — Fri, 12 Dec 2025 00:09:35 +0000

In reply to Void. While CA doesn't require a permit per se as some other States do, we *are* required here to pass a written test and obtain a firearms safety certificate before being allowed to purchase. CA's argument is for public safety. So still a requirement for permission from our overlords.

By: Void

Void — Thu, 11 Dec 2025 21:02:07 +0000

LOL I think everyone in CA, NY, NJ, MA, CT, DE, and maybe CO just exclaimed duh.