Jim Wallace from GOAL is running for the NRA Board. I will be voting for him.
Candidates are falling all over themselves looking for support from the gun vote. From the Adirondack Daily Enterprise, “5 candidates for 2 seats say they favor gun rights“:
“… All three candidates in New York’s 23rd Congressional District and all two in New York’s 20th District say they agree with a federal Supreme Court decision Monday that said the federal constitutional guarantee of an individual’s right to bear arms overrides laws that state and local governments pass …”
The Second Amendment: The new normal.*
“… Chris Gibson says he is “an outspoken supporter of the right to bear arms and to protect one’s life, loved ones and property,” … “This ruling reaffirms our constitutional right and protects this right from overreaching state and local governments who forget that they too are obligated to uphold the constitution …”
“… 251 representatives and 58 senators who signed an amicus curiae brief asking Chicago’s handgun ban be overturned … Rep. Murphy, D-Glens Falls, who said he signed it “because the government does not have the right to violate the Second Amendment and strip American citizens of this critical freedom. This landmark decision will further strengthen the constitutional precedent and protect our rights from unjust laws for years to come.” …”
“… Bill Owens says he is a “strong supporter of the Second Amendment.” Doug Hoffman, however, says he is a “vocal supporter of our Second Amendment rights,” while Matt Doheny says he is “a firm believer in our right to bear arms.” …”
* quote stolen from Uncle.
Legislative Report #27 is now online.
Off the AP wire, “Gun law challenges likely after high court ruling“:
“… Drawn-out permitting processes in New York and elsewhere also are ripe for a challenge, [Eugene] Volokh said. “I think a court will have no problem upholding a one-, two-, five-day waiting period,” he said. “But if you’re talking about a five-month wait, then a court may find it’s a substantial burden.” New York restricts who can possess and carry guns, allowing handgun permits only to applicants of “good moral character.” New Yorkers who want to carry their weapons must show “good cause” in addition to character, under a 99-year-old law. James Jacobs, a New York University law professor, said the high court presumes people have a right to a gun unless the government can show there’s a good reason to prevent it. The ruling, Jacobs said, “casts a long shadow over New York City’s gun regulations.” …”
Some reactions to the McDonald decision:
- Assemblywoman Michelle Schimel (D-16):
… “This decision in no way impacts microstamping legislation. It’s crime prevention. It is not a ban.” …
- Assemblyman Marc Butler (R-117) :
… “We need to follow the Supreme Court’s lead here in New York by stopping further attempts to pass egregious anti-gun legislation, such as microstamping, which not only restricts our constitutional freedom but poses a detriment to our economic recovery.” …
- Congressman Scott Murphy (D-20):
… “I commend the United States Supreme Court for protecting our constitutional right to bear arms. I was honored to lend my voice to this case by signing an Amicus Brief because the government does not have the right to violate the 2nd Amendment and strip American citizens of this critical freedom. This landmark decision will further strengthen the constitutional precedent and protect our rights from unjust laws for years to come.” …
- Congressman Bill Owens (D- 23):
… “I applaud this decision by the Supreme Court to uphold the federally protected right of every American to keep and bear arms. I am a strong supporter of the Second Amendment and I am glad to see that it cannot be infringed upon by state and local governments.” …
- Nan Hayworth (R-CD-19) :
… “Monday the Supreme Court handed down its decision in the Second Amendment-rights case McDonald v. Chicago. The majority opinion, written by Associate Justice Samuel Alito, affirmed what many of us have known all along: that the Second Amendment protects an individual right, not to be infringed by any government, whether federal, state, or local” …
Jackie Hilly drinks the kool aid:
“… Jackie Hilly, Executive Director of New Yorkers Against Gun Violence, told NBC New York she’s pleased with the decision. “I think it affirms New York law,” Hilly said. “All the other amendments have reasonable restrictions on them. So I actually really like the Heller decision and the McDonald decision because they put the Second Amendment in the context of all the other amendments…people from the gun lobby like to promote the idea that you have an absolute or god-given right to possess a gun. That’s clearly not true; your right can be restricted.” …”
Even crap rags like the Daily News ain’t buying that:
“… the majority also failed to endorse anew an observation that the courts had long “held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment.” The omission was ominous.”
Pro-gun press releases.
… Laws pertaining to the 2nd Amendment must be held to the same standards of strict scrutiny as laws pertaining to the 1st Amendment …
… The NRA will work to ensure this constitutional victory is not transformed into a practical defeat by activist judges, defiant city councils, or cynical politicians who seek to pervert, reverse, or nullify the Supreme Court’s McDonald decision through Byzantine labyrinths of restrictions and regulations that render the Second Amendment inaccessible, unaffordable, or otherwise impossible to experience in a practical, reasonable way …
… All law-abiding Americans, no matter whether they live in a big city like Chicago or in rural Wyoming, have the same Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. Constitutional rights don’t stop at state or city borders …
… In effectively striking down Chicago’s handgun ban, and incorporating the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms so that it applies to state and local governments as well as the federal government, the high court affirmed that a constitutionally-protected civil right cannot be arbitrarily regulated as though it were a privilege …
… The McDonald decision, along with the Court’s 2008 decision in the D.C. v. Heller case, serve merely as cornerstones to a much larger effort to fully restore the law-abiding citizen’s rights guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment to our Constitution …
Antigun press releases.
- Brady Campaign:
… We can expect two things as a result of today’s decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in McDonald v. Chicago: the gun lobby and gun criminals will use it to try to strike down gun laws, and those legal challenges will continue to fail …
- Violence Policy Center:
… People will die because of this decision …