The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State …
A guy claiming to be just your ordinary gun owner, but is really a heavy Democratic Donor and a professor at an Idaho University, says no one should listen to us crazy gun people when it comes to Sotomayor. I guess he’s been getting his AHSA newsletter.
Started with Joe, who notes this guy isn’t like any other Idaho gun owner he knows, worked over to Thirdpower, who discovers he’s a big Democrat donor, and then Caleb, who notices he’s a liar too.
Mike Cox, Attorney General of Michigan:
The Free Press failed to mention that 34 attorneys general signed on to the NRA’s challenge of Chicago’s strict gun ban, including both Democrats and Republicans. This isn’t about politics; it’s about standing up for principle.
It may come as news to the Free Press, but this office files amicus briefs all the time to protect the rights of the state and its citizens. For example, this office has filed amicus briefs in support of the Big Three auto industry and tougher standards to protect the Great Lakes.
[…]
I make no apologies for my support of the Constitution and the Second Amendment.
Good on him for not backing down.
Really? I’d have to find out whether it’s the national ACLU or the state chapter. Some of the state chapters are not hostile toward gun rights. If it’s the national ACLU, perhaps they are coming around.
And signed by Jack Markell? A few days after Jerry Brown signs onto Second Amendment incorporation? Did NRA launch a leftist mind control satellite with all that money they are making by scamming people into paying for DVDs they didn’t order? If so, can they turn it on Fast Eddie next?
Fred “One-Gun-a-Month” Madden seems to be trying to get some cover in the media, and I guess Bryan Miller called in some favors from his buddies at the Inquirer:
Corzine pushed the bill through the Legislature late last month only after agreeing to create a task-force team whose first job will be considering amendments to ensure that collectors, competitive shooters, and recreational gun users “are not adversely affected.”
That could open the door for exceptions.
With the plan stuck one vote short of passage in the Senate, the compromise was needed to win over Sen. Fred Madden (D., Gloucester), who agreed to vote “yes” on the condition that concerns of law-abiding gun users – specifically collectors and competitive shooters – were addressed.
So pass a bad law first, and then go back and fix it later. Always a winning strategy! Then you have Bryan saying the same thing:
“We don’t want to create any problems for the hunters, for competitive shooters, for legitimate collectors. If we can find a way to make it easier for legitimate competitive shooters, great,” Miller said.
How do you define a “legitimate competitive shooter?” or “legitimate collector?” There’s no certificate, you know. Am I a legitimate competitive shooter? How can you tell?
But via SayUncle, we have a new study from the Joyce Foundation. You know what it concluded?
The study found no effect on gun trafficking within the state from laws limiting handgun sales to a maximum of one gun per person per month.
Got that? Even Bryan’s funders can’t find evidence this law does anything. So why do we need it in New Jersey?
Two-thirds of the nation’s attorneys general have filed an amicus brief asking the U.S. Supreme Court to grant certiorari in the case of NRA v. Chicago and hold that the Second Amendment applies to state and local governments through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. This bi-partisan group of 33 attorneys general, along with the Attorney General of California in a separate filing, agrees with the NRA’s position that the Second Amendment protects a fundamental individual right to keep and bear arms in the home for self-defense, disagreeing with the decision recently issued by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.
So this was bigger than just Jerry Brown. Two thirds of the state’s Attorney Generals is no small feat, and sends a strong message to the Court.
Dustin looks at all the successes this year. Many of these are great victories, but among those are the Parking Lot bill. From the “not sure why NRA makes this a priority” department, the Goldwater Institute, normally a friend of gun rights, is planning on challenging the legitimacy of the law.
“The Goldwater Institute strongly supports the right to keep and bear arms,” Bolick stated, adding that the Institute filed a brief in Heller v. District of Columbia, the U.S. Supreme Court case that strengthened Second Amendment rights. “But it is a right against government, not against private individuals. This bill does violence to private property rights.”
As I’ve said, I don’t think the issue is really about property rights, but is really about employment law. Whatever is in your car is your property, and your employer has no legal power to search your vehicle. But your employer doesn’t have to continue a relationship with you if you do something that’s a violation of the employee agreement. That employers bar guns in their workplaces and on their property is no more a violation of my right to bear arms than if a friend has the same rule for his house. My response to a friend who wanted to search my vehicle would be the same as it would be to an employer, namely a to very nicely and politely tell them to go to hell.
As a society, we do accept government intrusion into the employer/employee relationship for a number of things, chief among those to prevent discrimination. But that is a special case. As a rule, I’m not comfortable with the government interfering in private relationships. It is a restriction on freedom of association that should not occur in a free society. There are better ways to make companies reconsider anti-gun policies than by government meddling in private relationships.
Cemetery has a link to a letter he receieved from Fred “One-Gun-a-Month” Madden, assuring him that he was against the the one-gun-a-month bill. Looks like New Jersey Coalition for Self-Defense picked up on this one too. I wonder what Fred’s spiel is now?
Looks like some folks are planning on suing over the restaurant carry thing. Walls of the City points out how ridiculous the suit is. You also have cities claiming that public streets are no such thing. Louisville had a similar setup, though without the metal detectors. You had to present ID and be over 21 to walk down the street. I figured carry was fine as long as you weren’t drinking or at the bar. Kentucky’s law allows carry in restaurants, just not the bar area. I’m pretty sure carry is fine down that street in TN too. Someone needs to challenge that.
New Jersey Senator Fred Madden and Governor Corzine apparently thinks it ought to be harder for law enforcement officers to get the firearms they need to protect themselves while on duty. While the New Jersey one-gun-a-month law provides exceptions for law enforcement, it doesn’t offer exemptions for the dealers many smaller law enforcement agencies purchase firearms from. Agencies that are too small for distributors to deal with directly.