Trump takes aim at 3D-printed guns. *Update Judge blocks release of plans for 3D-printed guns amid Dem outrage*

[Roundballer]

Article IV Sec 4 does not say anything about secure borders, it guarantees states protection from a foreign invasion. As much as the right would like to believe, Mexico is hardly "invading" the US.

Try thinking beyond the actual words that are used and try to understand the meaning and implication of those words. That section with Article I Section 9 and the 10th amendment clearly places the control of the borders in the realm, jurisdiction and authority of the Federal Government. That includes any foreign invasion by any number of people that are not citizens of this country. It does not have to be a foreign nation sponsored army, it does not need to even be an army or even sponsored by anyone. It can be just a large "influx" of foreign nationals. And you seem to have nothing to say about the rest of what I posted.

Perhaps I misspoke, no, they have no way of knowing what you intend on doing with it. But by conducting a NICS check, they are at least doing some due diligence in checking that you do not have a criminal background. You have no way of knowing this during a personal transfer. The very fact that you are required to conduct a NICS check is evidence that the FFL isn't assuming on good faith that you should be able to purchase a firearm...you have no such obligation during a personal sale other than your judgement.

What evidence is there that a NICS check does anything at all (other than slow down a legitimate purchase)? How did the whole system work prior to '68 when you could write a check and mail it to a company, then have the firearm show up on your doorstep a few weeks later?

Try to wrap your mind around this concept: You can not prove a negative! You can not prove that you did not commit a crime in the past. All the NICS check is, is a huge (and significantly flawed) data base (several actually) that contains lists of PEOPLE that THEY BELIEVE MAY commit a crime based on selected criteria. Many of which are not violent and/or should not preclude firearm ownership. Just remember "Three Felonies a Day", and the fact that it is "felony" you loose.

By that rationale, we should not have any law that limits anyone because criminals are just going to break them anyways so what's the point of inconveniencing the law abiding? i.e. If illegal/criminal immigrants are just going to get into this country illegally, what's the point of having legal immigration if it's just going to inconvenience the law abiding immigrants that try and come into this country correctly?

Non Sequitur.

[10x25mm]

Article IV Sec 4 does not say anything about secure borders, it guarantees states protection from a foreign invasion. As much as the right would like to believe, Mexico is hardly "invading" the US......

The Guarantee Clause was very much written about secure borders, specifically ordering the Federal Government to protect all States from Indian tribe and Canadian/British incursions. This was written as a direct consequence of Revolutionary War experience. Throughout the Revolution and in the following years leading up to the writing of the Constitution, American forces were continuously fending off incursions by nomadic Indian tribes.

Indian tribes were considered entirely foreign at the time. Their incursions - families and warriors - were little different from the current invasion from Mexico and Central America, right down to armed gangs like Mara Salvatrucha and El Sureños.