CA City Councilman Claims Second Amendment Means Government Can Regulate Guns

A city councilman in California needs to take a nice, long step toward a library and reread the Second Amendment.

You see, Councilman Mark Olbert sits on the San Carlos City Council, where they were considering a moratorium that would block a retail store from opening. The store would also sell guns, which is all but guaranteed to put a burr in the saddle of any California politician.

Olbert supported the moratorium but was reported as making a claim that makes so little sense as to be laughable were this not from someone tasked with making laws for regular folks.

Turner’s Outdoorsman has already signed a 10-year lease for the location on Industrial Road near REI, and has spent $125,000 on the new store.

Grocott also said he was concerned that the city may see a lawsuit from Turner’s or a Second Amendment group such as the NRA.

But Councilman Mark Olbert, who voted “hell yes” for the moratorium, had a different take on the issue. Olbert said that since guns are the only commodity mentioned in the Bill of Rights, government is allowed to regulate guns.

Yes, that’s what he apparently said.

Now, let’s look at where guns are mentioned in the Constitution.

A well-regulated milita being necessary to the security of a free state, the people’s right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Hmmmmm.

I’m not seeing anything that says regulations are welcome. In fact, the phrase “shall not be infringed” clearly indicates otherwise.

While the Supreme Court has ruled that some regulations are justified, that wasn’t what Olbert was alluding to. After all, he doesn’t seem to mention the Court’s rulings on the matter. Instead, he simply quips that because guns are even mentioned in the Constitution, he can do what he wants.

Read More at Bearing Arms