The Lautenberg amendment was the camel's nose under the tent, this was the camel coming completely into the tent.
It's insane that a right could be taken after a misdemeanor conviction. If it's serious enough to deprive someone of their rights then it's serious enough to be a felony.
Actually, laws prohibiting ex felons (felons who served their time and "paid their debt to society") from owning a firearm was the camel's nose under the tent. If it's an actual right, then being an ex felon should not have any effect on it, so long as one is not currently and lawfully in the custody of the state.
That is true. There was no prohibition on felons owning firearms until the Gun Control Act of 1968 was passed.
Correct, and once you allow for one exception, where the state may violate the Second Amendment prohibition against infringement on the RTKABA, there's no logical stop to the progression of this trend. It should never have been allowed to start with.
For example in California you are prohibited from possessing a weapon if you:
1. are a Felon.
2. adjudicated mentally insane.
3. convicted of a misdemeanor domestic violence.
4. convicted of a misdemeanor battery (10 year limit)
and since Jerry Brown came back...
5. have had a dui in the last seven years.
6. been detained for a temporary mental/emotional observation.
7. owe the State back taxes.
Inch by inch.