Posted on 06/29/2008 8:40:17 PM PDT by neverdem
The Supreme Court's gun ruling is driving a wedge through the ranks of Mayor Bloomberg's Coalition of Mayors Against Illegal Guns.
As mayors from across the country denounced the decision to overturn the Washington, D.C., ban on handguns, Mr. Bloomberg issued a statement saying it would "benefit" his coalition, and predicted it would have no impact on the city's regulation of handguns.
His remarks were a sharp departure from those made by mayors Richard Daley of Chicago and Gavin Newsom of San Francisco, both prominent members of the coalition whose cities' gun laws have been targeted by the National Rifle Association.
Mr. Newsom told The New York Sun yesterday that he is "very concerned about the inevitable assault on our gun restrictions," and said the decision "opens the door for that attack."
Mr. Daley called the ruling: "very frightening," according to the Chicago Tribune.
Mr. Bloomberg, who founded the more than 320-member coalition with Mayor Thomas Menino of Boston, argued that the decision would aid his group's efforts to crack down on the trafficking and prevalence of guns purchased illegally because it would put to rest the ideological debates that "obscured an obvious fact: Criminals, who have no right to purchase or possess guns, nevertheless have easy access to them."
He said the coalition's fight against illegal guns has never had anything to do with the Second Amendment, and said it...
--snip--
It would be hard to interpret the case's outcome as a positive for people in favor of gun control, he said, adding that he doubted the city's gun regulations could withstand a constitutional attack based on yesterday's decision.
"The language of the decision and the spirit of the decision suggests that when the challenge to New York's law comes, it will be struck down as unconstitutional," he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at nysun.com ...
I hope NYC is on the NRA’s lawsuit list (like S.F. and Chi. are).
FReepmail me if you want on or off my New York ping list.
In an unrelated story, chickens see benefit in KFC and Tyson success. “This will not affect our ability to cross the road”, according to a leading spokeschicken.
In upstate New York, in order to get a handgun permit you have to go through a process that takes 6 months. You also have to have 4 friends sign your application as sponsors. I imagine this form will be one of the first challenges. If it’s an individual right, why are other people necessary to get a license?
This should cheer you up: From the article, "A professor at the New York University School of Law, James Jacobs, author of "Can Gun Control Work?" said he thought Mr. Bloomberg was putting some spin on the decision, which he described as a tremendous victory for gun-rights proponents."
"It would be hard to interpret the case's outcome as a positive for people in favor of gun control, he said, adding that he doubted the city's gun regulations could withstand a constitutional attack based on yesterday's decision."
"The language of the decision and the spirit of the decision suggests that when the challenge to New York's law comes, it will be struck down as unconstitutional," he said.
The costs, time and hassle to obtain a handgun in NYC and select other locales amounts to far more than “reasonable restrictions.”
Why do you people keep writing about having permits and licenses as if they were a good thing. The supreme court just affirmed that you have a right to keep and bear arms.
The government is prohibited from infringing upon that right and the court has already spoken in previous cases that you cannot attach restrictions to a right.
Maybe we ought to call em up and tell them we have changed our minds, and do not need firearms because we are to timid to exercise that right.
Well you can if you want to, not me, I have not and I will not register my arms and I will not accept a permit or license to own or carry them.
Semper Fi
An Old Man
The poll tax that the Supremes shot down in the late 1960s was $1.50. So I expect all these periodic registration and licensing schemes will go the way of the mastedon when these governments are told that they have to be free. As they are now, they are punitive revenue raisers on a recognized right.
Thanks for the ping!
Unfortunately, if you read Scalia's decision, he states that it's not an absolute tight, and is subject to some "reasonable restrictions". So there will need to be many, many test cases to determine what is a "reasonable restriction". He did state it cannot be such an impediment that it becomes impractical to actually meet the reqirements, nor can it ban entire classes of commonly used firearms (e.g. handguns). But as for other restrictions, each will need to be tested. Different district and appeals courts will no doubt use different intreptations of the decision, and those will need to be resolved. So we haven't seen the last of the issue before SCOTUS, by a long shot (pun intended).
Not true. For example, local governments can demand that protest organizers obtain a permit, and be restricted to certain times and places.
Note that this was on one of those first amendment things that the liberals love so much.
Semper Fi
An Old Man
To paraphrase Fritz Hollingsworth: "There's a whole lot of denouncin' going on."
I've done some "denouncin'" in days gone by. It's their turn, now.
Prohibition never works, be it alcohol, drugs or guns. That’s why bans are a bad idea. I know lots of people that just drove in handguns from out of state. They keep them near their beds. Unregistered, unlicensed. It is case of making criminals out of law abiding citizens.
I am very much looking forward to Kalifornia having to pay the expenses of their gun control from the general revenues rather than charging fees to exercise a right. Let's let the teachers and prison guards dwell on the possibility that harassing me with pointless gun laws will jeopardize their pensions.
Seems to me that NYC’s Sullivan law should be struck down because of the SCOTUS ruling.
I’d do a better job at running NYC than Bloomberg, and I’m 22.
***Seems to me that NYC’s Sullivan law should be struck down because of the SCOTUS ruling.***
Exactly, I mentioned that in another thread.
it came out my nose...lol.
This is the best view one can obtain when one’s head is that far up one’s ass.
Where are all the GOA supporters and when is the GOA going to join in the fight? I already asked on another gun board and they aren’t there.
You can’t be a no compromise group if you never do anything.
Just a way for “Ol’ Bloomers” to keep his name in the news hoping someone...anyone, will think he’s doing something.
Mr. Daley called the ruling: "very frightening," according to the Chicago Tribune.
Along with the editorial board of the Chicago Tribune.
I hear ya; the GOA’s sole mission seems to be criticizing the NRA. When it comes time for action they’re worse than useless. An impotent enterprise.
The way the story is excerpted makes it seem that Bloomie is predicting the city’s gun laws being found uncostitutional. In the actual text of the story that statement is made by a prof at NYU Law.
That wasn't my intention. It's one of the hazards from requiring excerpts.
Not meant as a criticism only an observation from a NYC school teacher who’s not into summer yet and is still examining sentence structure(even if my bosses force me to do it way under the radar).
Not meant as a criticism, only an observation from a NYC school teacher who’s not into summer yet and is still examining sentence structure(even if my bosses force me to do it way under the radar).
I have been saying this since Thursday. The decision will be read as a validation of the nutty gun laws in NYC and parts of Chicago. Yes you can own a gun, but the costs are very high.
I haven’t figured it out and I have met Larry Pratt who seems like a good solid supporter of gun rights.
Except they never, ever do anything. When they didn’t come out for the Katrina victims, I knew something was seriously wrong. Couple that with the thirty year old criticism of the NRA and you have to wonder.
There was also a nasty letter to Alan Gotlieb of some silly thing and Gotlieb[from the SAF] had to retalite. I noticed the NRA doesn’t even acknowledge the GOA exists but Alan hit them with both barrels. I wonder if I can find that letter.
It’s sorry but the GOA is a tshirt company and I’m being kind when I say that. It’s the only area of expertise they seem to be fairly good at.
I'm not so sure about that. SCOTUS called it an individual right. You don't pay over $1,000 over three years for a right.
Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections (No. 48)
That was a $1.50 poll tax.
It is regrettable that NRA is a defacto gun control organization. I’m a GOA member and have tremendous respect for NRA’s membership and their valuable training programs, but I do not approve of their legislative tactics (eg. endorsing Ron Paul’s anti-gun Democrat 2006 primary opponent, because Paul did not sign on to one of NRA’s compromise gun control bills) or their outright support of gun control, such as the Brady Bill, otherwise known as national registration.
And here is Pratt’s response:
http://www.gunowners.org/swasd06.htm
And here is another pro-gun critique of “safe storage”
http://www.gunowners.org/swasd08.htm
And here is Gottlieb’s defense of lock up your safety legislation:
http://www.gunowners.org/swasd02.htm
CCRKBA & SAF send me a ton of junk mail - almost 100% bogus surveys, raffles and other such refuse which ends up in the trash can.
Yeah right, a "gun control organization" that just filed lawsuits challenging local gun bans in San Francisco and Chicago. ....and several of its suburbs. A "gun control organization" that filed a federal lawsuit to recover hundreds of guns seized from New Orleans residents in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, and won.
The list of NRA victories and action against the gun-grabbers is endless; the ones I listed above are merely the two most recent and prominent.
And GOA victories? Squat. Always and forever, squat. All case, no powder.
Welcome to middle class working Americans.
They have families to raise. To busy..
That would be the rational answer, but the way things are today I doubt it would fly.
Remember, this is also the court that said your house can be seized if someone offers to pay the county more taxes for it.
I have been waiting for years for someone on FR to tell me just what the GOA has ever done by themselves and so far not a single answer. Just more insults to the NRA.
I used to live in Oak Park, Illinois. It’s a single town with a single party system similiar to Chicago and I even asked members of the GOA to sue Oak Park. An ex-brother in law even spent time in jail because he had the nerve to have a handgun hidden in his sockdrawer.
There was no response from the GOA but I am was overjoyed when I heard the NRA is suing.
I wish I could be with the NRA in Oak Park. I won’t be there but some of my money will be there. I have the money order sitting next to the computer waiting to be put in an envelope.
NRA IS a gun control organization because of its support of gun control legislation. Period.
Incidentally, GOA does raise money to defend gun owners who are harassed or unjustly prosecuted (eg. the Ammo Dump gun store in Houston); they just don’t pat themselves on the back for it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.