Question For Our Constitutional Scholars

[OutAtTheEdge]

In the wake of yet another tragic shooting, we once again see politicians and the media clamoring about "gun violence", and declaring that "something must be done", in the form of new laws infringing on our 2A rights. This has me wondering...

Can anyone here cite for me any cases where any sort of laws have been enacted which infringed on other Amendments in the Bill of Rights, which also successfully dealt with a national crisis or escalating criminal trends? In other words, are there any non-2A precedents which would tend to validate draconian gun-control measures? And have there been any cases where an attempt was made that ended in a recognized failure to either achieve the desired goal, or to pass muster on a Constitutional basis?

It seems to me this would be good information to have at our disposal when discussing our rights with those who may not share our opinions.

 

[duke2002]

Not 2A but the volstead act.

 

[45Smashemflat]

I'm not sure it was considered a "success", but Executive Order 9066, which created the Japanese internment camps during WWII certainly infringed on basic rights of citizens. It was eventually cancelled and various forms of reparations were paid out over the years following the war.

 

[OutAtTheEdge]

I'm not sure it was considered a "success", but Executive Order 9066, which created the Japanese internment camps during WWII certainly infringed on basic rights of citizens. It was eventually cancelled and various forms of reparations were paid out over the years following the war.

Thanks for the input. I was actually thinking of this very thing when I posed the question.