The 2nd Amendment is clear, according to Heller. All persons in the USA have the Right to Keep & Bear Arms. NO distinction is made in the 2nd Amendment as far as citizens, Permanent Residents, folks with a travel Visa, folks with a work Visa, folks with a diplomatic Visa, folks with an education Visa, or illegal aliens. Courts have made it clear most Constitutional Protections also protect Illegal Aliens. Right against Self-Incrimination, Right to an Attorney, Right to a Speedy trial, etc. That means illegal aliens have the Constitutional Right to possess a firearm.
really? find me a case that supports it. Illegal immigrants cannot serve on juries, run for office or vote
Going by the constitution I am surprised you blokes dont let felons have guns or guns whilst being in a pub. It is kind of like you bring out the 2nd amendment when it suits your position but any other suggestion is a clear violation of the 2nd.
no but the Supreme Court has made it clear they possess 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 14th Amendment protections. and the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals declared Illegal Aliens are protected by the 2nd Amendment http://reason.com/blog/2015/08/24/ilegal-aliens-have-second-amendment-righ
the seventh circuit got bitch slapped by the USSC in McDonald IIRC. brilliant but often mentally erratic Judge Posner got schooled in that one
USA v Meza-Rodriguez http://reason.com/blog/2015/08/24/ilegal-aliens-have-second-amendment-righ as per voting rights, each State has the choice to let anyone they want vote, including Undocumented Immigrants.
Instead of reading some liberal blog where the author can't understand the difference between "yes" and "no", you can read the ruling here. http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-b...-20/C:14-3271:J:Wood:aut:T:fnOp:N:1608386:S:0 The appeals court denied his case, he lost, and he was not granted 2A rights. In fact the court found that illegal aliens as a class, even if for some reason the 2A extended to non-citizens, could be denied ownership of firearms. Regardless, they still can't legally purchase one. Being in the country illegally is a question on the 4473, which immediately disqualifies you. Oh and he was also a convicted felon, so the point is moot.
The actual court ruling itself stated that Meza Rodriguez has his motion denied, meaning he could not invoke the second amendment as a legal defense against unlawful possession of a firearm.
Ronstar, u no understan' da Constitution. One, you misread the Constitution, deliberately. Two, you either misunderstand or troll with Heller.
It's funny how the left wants more gun laws, they can't even enforce the laws we have already on the books https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_Control_Act_of_1968 It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person— (1) is under indictment for, or has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year; (2) is a fugitive from justice; (3) is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802)); (4) has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution; (5) who, being an alien— (A) is illegally or unlawfully in the United States; or (B) except as provided in subsection (y)(2), has been admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa (as that term is defined in section 101(a)(26) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 (a)(26))); (6) who [2] has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions; (7) who, having been a citizen of the United States, has renounced his citizenship; ( is subject to a court order that restrains such person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner of such person or child of such intimate partner or person, or engaging in other conduct that would place an intimate partner in reasonable fear of bodily injury to the partner or child, except that this paragraph shall only apply to a court order that— (A) was issued after a hearing of which such person received actual notice, and at which such person had the opportunity to participate; and (B) (i) includes a finding that such person represents a credible threat to the physical safety of such intimate partner or child; or (ii) by its terms explicitly prohibits the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against such intimate partner or child that would reasonably be expected to cause bodily injury; or (9) has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.
Being in this country illegally is, by definition, an ongoing commission of a criminal act. No person - be they citizen, legal resident, et. al. - can legally be in possession of a firearm when engaged in criminal activity.
The core argument behind 2nd Amendment purists is that it recognizes a natural right for mankind, that all human beings have a natural right to self defense, to protect their family and property. Are Undocumented Immigrants not human beings? Do they not possess natural rights? Do they not possess the right to self-defense?
the SCOTUS has affirmed that Illegal Immigrants possess 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 14th Amendment protections.
18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5) (g) It shall be unlawful for any person— (5) who, being an alien— (A) is illegally or unlawfully in the United States; or (B) except as provided in subsection (y)(2), has been admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa (as that term is defined in section 101(a)(26) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(26))); Now, counter to the law the Seventh Circuit noted that three other federal appeals courts have said that illegal aliens do not have Second Amendment rights, but concluded that those courts were wrong, creating what lawyers call a “circuit split” by holding that § 922(g)(5) is unconstitutional. So now will the court also find that having to be an adult to purchase a firearm or not a felon is 'unconstitutional' too?
The US Code is simply laws passed by Congress. This law was never deemed Constitutional by the Supreme Court. But the Supreme Court HAS many times declared that Illegal Immigrants are protected by the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 14th Amendments.
I've never researched it, but the Founders wrote "the right of the people to keep and bear ..." So who did they mean by "the people"? I could be persuaded that they meant the citizens of the U.S.