What defines "reasonable restrictions"?

[iverglas]

64. hm

I'm not sure how a case centering on the constitutionality of a drug statute that mandates assumptions of trafficking relate to the topic at hand.

Colour me not surprised.

This is why I suggested that you would benefit from a course in constitutional law, if you choose to engage in the discussion of concepts that belong to that field.

the canadian constitution, obviously, is not the gatekeeper of US rights and laws.

Unfortunately, I had written this post in direct response to your invitation in the other thread, and not in relation to any other content in this thread.

I hav since added another post in which I suggested that you investigate the concept in your own constitutional law, and linked to some google results that should give you a leg up in that direction.

Presumably you were not aware that the term was used in Heller and has also been used by the USSC in relation to the exercise of rights relating to speech and religion, for example. I think you would agree, then, that this is the place to start if you seek to understand the meaning of the term.

Yeah, I kind of figured that would be the response but truth be told so many of your posts are combative I honestly don't feel like hunting through your posts in other threads.

Well, I suppose I should be hurt and disappointed by that. Oddly, I'm not.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=6102

You could do a little searchie of this forum for the last 48 hours for the word "registration" and find the others, I imagine.

Oh hell, I'm feeling generous and have some work I need to avoid, so I'll do your homework.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/11725811#post10

In order to seriously address and effectively reduce the risk of harm associated with access to firearms, what is needed is:

(a) mandatory licensing of persons, so that anyone who wishes to acquire / possess firearms is first screened for risk factors, to the extent possible and reasonable
- this will reduce the risk of inappropriate candidates for firearms possession acquiring firearms

(b) mandatory registration of firearms, so that the identity of anyone who acquires / possesses a firearm is known and associated with that firearm, which can then be traced to that person if it is sold or otherwise transferred, or lost or stolen
- this will reduce the risk of straw purchases and of firearms being otherwise transferred by lawful owners to ineligible persons

(c) mandatory safe/secure storage of firearms
- this will reduce the risk of firearms being accessed by children or thieves, or used for improper purposes by owners

(d) public information and education campaigns to encourage compliance with the above requirements, e.g. about the risks involved in transferring firearms to ineligible persons and in failing to secure firearms when not in use

(I have added the fourth item as a separate proposal since I have always had to point out this need in responding to objections to the efficacy of the other measures proposed, and since it is in fact necessary in order to reach the lawful firearms owners who are the source of many of the firearms used to commit crimes and cause harm.)


I might add:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/11725835#post9

Argument from judicial authority works in court. It doesn't work in discussions of public policy where the issues are efficacy and reasonableness -- constitutions are of course a consideration, but judicial interpretations of constitutions are subject to critique like any other opinion.