BREAKING: Judge ALLOWS WAITING PERIODS in GREATEST mental gymnastics to date. DRUNKS & MANUFACTURING

Published on November 14, 2023
Duration: 9:20

This video analyzes a recent judge's ruling in Colorado that denied an injunction against mandatory 3-day waiting periods for firearm purchases. The speaker highlights the judge's reasoning, which includes interpreting the Second Amendment as pertaining to 'confrontation' and distinguishing the act of acquiring a firearm from 'keeping and bearing' it. The judge's comparison of modern firearm production and logistics to 18th-century manufacturing, and his analogy between waiting periods and laws regulating intoxicated persons, are critically examined.

Quick Summary

A Colorado judge denied an injunction against mandatory 3-day firearm waiting periods, interpreting the Second Amendment as focused on 'confrontation' and distinguishing firearm acquisition from 'keeping and bearing.' The ruling compared modern waiting periods to historical production delays and laws regulating intoxicated persons.

Chapters

  1. 00:00Introduction: Judge's Ruling on Waiting Periods
  2. 00:11Mental Gymnastics: The Judge's Reasoning
  3. 01:26Case Details: RMGO vs. Polis
  4. 01:47Interpreting the Second Amendment: Confrontation Clause
  5. 02:39Acquisition vs. Keeping and Bearing
  6. 04:30Founders' Intent and Modern Manufacturing
  7. 06:15Historical Precedent and 1923 Laws
  8. 06:59Analogy to Intoxication Laws
  9. 08:54Recap: Drunk People & Production
  10. 09:15Viewer Opinion and Conclusion

Frequently Asked Questions

What was the core legal argument in the Colorado judge's ruling on waiting periods?

The judge interpreted the Second Amendment as pertaining to 'confrontation' and distinguished the act of acquiring a firearm from 'keeping and bearing' it. This allowed the court to argue that mandatory waiting periods on acquisition do not infringe upon the core Second Amendment right.

How did the judge compare modern firearm acquisition to historical practices?

The judge compared modern firearm production and logistics to 18th-century manufacturing, where delays were inherent. He suggested that state-mandated waiting periods are analogous to these historical production delays, despite vast differences in modern inventory and shipping capabilities.

What analogy did the judge use to justify firearm waiting periods?

The judge drew an analogy between mandatory firearm waiting periods and historical laws that regulated intoxicated persons. The argument was that both aim to prevent impulsive acts of violence by individuals who might act rashly due to diminished judgment or intoxication.

When were mandatory firearm waiting periods first enacted in the US, according to the ruling?

The ruling noted that no law requiring a waiting period for firearm purchases was enacted in the United States until 1923. This point was used to suggest a lack of historical tradition for such regulations predating the founding era.

Related News

All News →

More 2nd Amendment & Law Videos You Might Like

More from Langley Outdoors Academy

View all →