Not a flame of any kind.... but I'm curious. How is it that preventing a convicted felon from voting or possessing a firearm not an infringement against their 2nd amendment rights? I'm asking you because you seem like a pretty intelligent & articulate guy. I never quite understood that part of it.
Interesting question - I could argue it from a number of angles. For my money the argument that when someone chooses to commit a felony he chooses to voluntarily forfeit his right to own a firearm is pretty strong. It's similar to how you forfeit your right to be free and end up in jail when you commit crimes.
However I don't believe that my variation of the argument has ever been tested in Court. As such, it's just theoretical.
I am not a lawyer, but my understanding is that Courts have leveraged the "almighty congress clause" also known as the interstate commerce clause of the Constitution in ruling this particular Federal law constitutional.
Personally, I find most interstate commerce clause based decisions to be fairly weak, often so weak that they don't pass the giggle test. But the precedent is there and the ICC is so broad that it lends itself to just about anything. That's why Courts use it.
