The government doesn’t have to prove a crime at all.  They just have to lay out a case of subjective claims that the individual is “dangerous” and shouldn’t have a gun.

Every time rashly adopted “harsher gun laws” cause a manufacturer to impose cutbacks or move, it affects ordinary people’s lives and their ability to earn an honest living.

One Harvard graduate student, whose landlord wanted to kick her out during finals because her roommate’s “feelings are hurt” over her lawfully owned guns.

David Hogg wants a federal tax on firearms and ammunition. He has repeatedly broached the idea, including multiple times on Twitter, and only sometimes suggests a use for the tax revenue. Hogg’s tweets on a federal gun tax include references to implementing the same sort of licensing and permitting requirements …

Huffman told the Washington Post he has concerns someone would be able to gain access to a firearm legally kept in the Capitol and use it for a nefarious act.

While the Democrats’ gun control push will not prevent mass shootings, it will criminalize a grandfather for passing his goose gun to his grandson without government permission. It will also criminalize a mother who gives her college-age daughter a revolver for self-defense without first getting government permission.

Much remains unsettled about the political landscape we will face in the coming two years. But this much is certain—more intense battles over the Second Amendment are in front of us.

Not only was Stevens wrong about the meaning of the Second Amendment.  He’s also wrong that recognition of the individual right has led to negative effects from “increasing gun use in this country.”

What Hogg is apparently unaware of is the very things he is promoting are the very things implemented by regimes in the twentieth century that led to the deaths of hundreds of millions of people.  Implementing such stupid unlawful “laws” doesn’t help stop mass shootings, it aids them.

The lawsuit challenges the measure on the grounds that it violates the commerce clause by banning sales of rifles to non-residents, and that it unconstitutionally impairs the rights guaranteed by the First, Second and Fourteenth Amendments, and Article I Section 24 of the Washington State Constitution by preventing the sale to otherwise qualified adults under age 21 of certain rifles.