New Mexico governor issues order suspending the right to carry firearms in public across Albuquerque

I love how effectively controversial things like this function like bug traps in drawing out the gnats - makes it easy to identify the low-effort trolls for a quick block.

I know right, this governor should have made murder illegal instead touches forhead

For a second there I worried my children could die without firearms!

I wasn't commenting on that, I was commenting on carrying a gun in public

Good thing open carry isn't protected then.

We'd definitely be better off if we actually care about how countries that are objectively better in multiple metrics do things differently.

Like oh I don't know, Healthcare. Plus the overwhelming amount of gun violence that doesn't exist in any other country than our own, the other ones are probably on to something.

my God do you realise how cringe this statement is

Well, how the people who haven't been shot yet live their lives at least.

I wish I could give you a gold award.

Hah, a classic!

Well I own 5 guns and would never even consider carrying in public ¯(ツ)_¯

You do realize hundreds of millions of people live here feeling perfectly safe, right?

Life is generally not what you see sensationalized on TV.

You think every criminal with a gun started the day as a criminal with a gun? The majority of mass shootings started that day as "just another perfectly legal person with a gun being allowed to carry wherever".

Tell me how many of the last 50 mass shootings were done by someone who was already a "criminal with a gun"

I mean, some of them? Plenty of people who shoot others are first offenders. And I'm sure even many dangerous people wouldn't carry a gun around if the mere act of carrying could get you sent to jail. Carrying being legal means that you can blend into the crowd of law abiding people.

Nobody thinks every gun crime will be stopped with any single act of gun control. But they all reduce it.

Specific places, generally, not open public places as specified in the article.

means well-supplied and ready to go on a moment's notice

Shall not be infringed. As someone else pointed out there's already a TRO, this is just a political stunt.

Is part of the dependent clause. Its reasoning.

If you paid attention in English class youd know this

Yawn, it's clear you don't know how to read literature from the period. There's plenty of explanation of the phrasing, indeed by the writers themselves in contemporary missives. But you don't really care, you already have your ideology.

Go read any Jane Austen and you'll learn. Even better, the Federalist Papers, or the Adams/Jefferson letters.

I look forward to seeing you proven incorrect by the courts. The TRO is already in place.

The supreme court is wrong about 2A. Laws and regulations are infringements, which the constitution specifically prohibits.

Biden-appointed U.S. District Court Judge David Urias said during a Wednesday hearing that the order violated the Constitution.

"The violation of a constitutional right, even for minimal periods of time, unquestionably constitutes irreparable injury," Urias said during the hearing.

How come it took so long if the premise was correct the entire time?

By talking point, you mean how the US constitution was written and the whole point of the supreme court?

Edit: Until congress does their job and pass legislation on these matters, this is unfortunately how the cookie crumbles.

Ah I didn't know that.

Well, grasping for straws, trying to say that she did something bold etc. Anyway I read in another article that a judge is blocking this