search
top

Jim Crow for Gun Owners

Dave Workman has an interesting take on Congressman Rush’s bill in Illinois, which requires a written test as a precondition of licensing:

From the late 1890s through the mid-1960s, African-American citizens in the Deep South were systematically and egregiously denied their voting rights through the administration of so-called “literacy tests.”

It took an act of Congress and some Supreme Court rulings to abolish this despicable form of bigotry. But apparently history is lost on Congressman Bobby L. Rush, who represents the 1st District of Illinois.

Astonishingly, this black congressman has introduced a gun control measure that would, among other things, require potential gun owners to first apply for a firearm license and before that license would be issued, they would have to present “a certificate attesting to the completion . . . of a written firearms examination.”

If he were proposing this for voting he’d be banished from town.  I guess in Congressman Rush’s world, some rights are more equal than others.

8 Responses to “Jim Crow for Gun Owners”

  1. Some rights are more equal than others in the worlds of many people. But you knew that, of course. :-)

  2. anon says:

    Such a test is already law in D.C.

  3. Sebastian says:

    Yeah, and I Think that should be challengable. The hard part is going to be finding a defendant that’s sympathetic. Pick someone with poor eyesight, and you have that issue. Pick someone who’s illiterate, you have all the baggage that likely comes along with that.

  4. Pick someone with poor eyesight, and you have that issue. Pick someone who’s illiterate, you have all the baggage that likely comes along with that.

    Perhaps, but couldn’t the Americans with Disabilities Act cover people like that? Would they not have to be accommodated in some way? I honestly don’t know, but at a glance it would seem to me taking that route might work.

  5. Tom says:

    So, uh, anyone written similar letters to their papers yet? If not, some of the amicus briefs have some good coverage on the history that can be included in there for further historical context.

    http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/amicus-briefs-for-heller-available-in-guns-case/

    I can’t remember which one, but it dealt extensively with the racist nature of early gun laws, something that wouldn’t hurt to be reinforced from time to time.

  6. Sebastian says:

    That might be good for an editorial generally calling for more gun control. If it’s editorializing on the assault weapons ban, you’ll want to address that issue specifically. A lot of people don’t consider banning assault weapons to outrageous, because they don’t understand what they are banning. They need that explained to them, and put in context.

  7. Sebastian says:

    It also helps if I know what comment you’re commenting on. Disregard previous comment :)

  8. Sebastian says:

    Err… what post. I need caffeine.

top