Top Menu

Judge Barrett on Guns: Heller Leaves Room For Gun Regulations

As I sit and watch Feinstein question Judge Amy Coney Barrett about different “issues” our country faces, the topic of guns has finally come up, and I just happened to be watching it live, as it did.

I'm honestly not sure how I feel about it because I tend to be of the frame of mind that says, “shall not be infringed” means exactly that. In other words, take your gun control and shove it.

Anyway, I've done my best to transcribe part of this interview because there weren't any videos as of the time I wrote this, but I'm not a transcriptionist and may have made a couple of mistakes.

Feinstein said in the interview:

This country is facing great gun violence. There has been a surge in gun sales during the Covid 19 crisis which has led to more lives being needlessly lost. According to the Gun Violence Archive, an independent research organization, there were 60 mass shootings in May alone. These shootings killed 40 people, they hurt 250 more.

Also there has been a troubling spike in gun sales. Americans bought approximately 2 million guns this past March. It's the second highest month ever for gun sales. That figure does not take into account all the gun sales that could not be completed because the purchaser could not pass a background check. A number that has also skyrocketed.

For example, this past March the FBI's background check system blocked 23,692 sales, more than double the number in March of 2019.

Do you agree that federal, state, and local governments have a compelling interest in preventing a rise in gun violence, particularly during a pandemic.

Judge Amy Coney Barrett's response:

Well senator, of course the constitutionality of any particular measure that was passed by any local or state governments or by this body would be subject to the same judicial process that I described with senator Graham.

What I will say, because this is just descriptive of Heller, Heller leaves room for gun regulations. And that's why there has been a lot of litigation in the lower courts, which makes me constrained not to comment on the limits of it. But Heller does not make a right absolute, which says so the opinion.

She also went on to say that the original meaning of the Second Amendment supports the idea that government can keep guns from dangerous people, like the mentally ill.

Now regarding the FBI's denials Feinstein listed, above:

I'm not sure if Feinstein knows it or not, but she basically said that the current measures put in place to make sure that bad people don't get guns, i.e. background checks, are working.

More than double the amount of people were blocked from purchasing a firearm from the same month last year. If that says anything to me, it's that background checks work to at least some degree. And, taking it a step further, if we were to fix the part of the background check system that was broken at the state level in various states where it has been found to be broken, it would work even better.

Here is a quote from a different article I wrote concerning this very thing:

It's a problem that is never spoken about, and rarely reported on, but in addition to criminals acquiring guns illegally, is a massive issue. In just one state, North Carolina, 145,000 crimes were not reported to the background check system over the past few decades.

Imagine law abiding gun owners having to pay with their gun rights because the state of NC failed to report 145,000 crimes to the background check system.

That's just one state, my friends, and I'm pretty certain it happens all over the place. You can read the rest of that article, here, if you're interested.

The current system of background checks works, but is flawed. They know this but won't admit to it. Why? Because it has never been about keeping people safe, it's about controlling the people.


Time will tell how this plays out. I'm not sure what my opinion is just yet, but I do believe that Judge Barrett is a better fit for the position than most others are. I just hope that when she says Heller leaves room for further legislation, that she means something positive for us and the Second Amendment, and not something negative that may further restrict our inalienable rights.

Leave your thoughts on this in the comments below.

, ,

8 Responses to Judge Barrett on Guns: Heller Leaves Room For Gun Regulations

  1. Terry Barker October 14, 2020 at 6:42 pm #

    Gun control is just another avenue to take a person’s ability to protect himself and family against criminals or even foreign invasion. I’m sure that is what our founding fathers had in mind when they wrote our constitution.

  2. Terry Barker October 14, 2020 at 7:03 pm #

    Taking our constitutional rights is the same as socialism.

    • Terry Doane October 15, 2020 at 5:29 pm #

      Good article. I’m pretty much in agreement with the author. I have a good feeling about judge Barrett since she was close to judge Scalia who, in my opinion, was the best Supreme Court Justice in my lifetime. Terry Barker, I think the number one reason for the second amendment was to protect ourselves against a tyrannical government. Our own.

  3. Dusty October 15, 2020 at 6:33 am #

    I was one of those people contributing to the increase in gun purchases this past year. I believe it is wrongly being attributed to the pandemic, as my reason was due to this coming election. People are worried about the availability of guns if the Democrats take control. We’re trying to stock up now in case they do something ridiculous to stop the sale of guns to normal law abiding citizens. Biden himself has already stated he would fight to stop online sales of guns and ammo. Where the heck am I going to buy ammo? My local stores have been out of stock since March….

  4. Stephen October 15, 2020 at 9:08 am #

    When Feinstein said how many shootings there were in mass shootings in March, April,
    and May with those statistics did she actually do any further investigations? The guns that used to commit such acts purchased legally? Don’t just throw out a number, and act like these people involved had background checks before getting access to the firearm.

  5. Tracy Staller October 16, 2020 at 5:01 am #

    To be honest, the 2nd amendment is mostly irrelevant. If you study the ratifying conventions it was intended by the framers to protect the states rights to arm a militia.
    Our state constitutions provide the protection of our individual rights to keep and bear arms. Because the regulation of firearms is not specifically given to the federal government in the constitution the 9th and 10th amendments apply and thus the regulation of firearms is reserved to the states period. The only exception would be that of interstate transport of firearms.

    We need better education and quit relying on an amendment that was never intended to protect individual rights rather grab hold of the inviolate protections provided by our individual state constitutions which none of the branches of the federal government has jurisdiction over.

  6. Michael Owens October 16, 2020 at 6:39 am #

    Barrett is wrong about the 2nd saying that the framers intended to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Am I crazy to thinks it means what it says? People that are mentally ill need to be in mental institutions especially those that are a danger to society. The people were revolting against the crown. Would the British government say that those colonists are madmen and should not have guns? Of course they would. So the the government would be in control by saying who can and cannot bear arms.
    Franken, I mean Feinstein is disarming the American people. People want to protect themselves from mobs mostly and we see what happened in St. Louis when a man and his wife are still alive because nobody in the mob wanted to be the first one to be shot. Where were the police at the time? Kyle Rittenhouse is alive today because he defended himself with a gun, otherwise he might have been beaten to death.

  7. Carlos Reira October 16, 2020 at 5:19 pm #

    “All who take up the sword will perish by it.” Our Constitution holds no weight in heaven.

Leave a Reply

All comments are moderated to ensure compliance with our community guidelines