After reading Kevin’s excellent piece about Meredith Graves, I’m reminded yet again that many liberal enclaves have not yet absorbed the lessons of McDonald v. Chicago. In McDonald (as most of you recall) the Supreme Court declared the right to keep and bear arms to be “fundamental” to the nation’s system of “ordered liberty” and applied its protections to state and local law through the doctrine of “incorporation.” In other words, the Supreme Court treated the Second Amendment the way it treats, for example, the First Amendment — as limiting government power at all levels.
In other contexts, incorporation has led to a remarkable degree of legal conformity. My First Amendment rights, for example, don’t vary much from New York to Los Angeles. While there are still individual permitting schemes and other relevant local ordinances, they stand and fall based not just on local conditions and facts but also (and primarily) on fealty to overarching federal constitutional principles.
Assuming the McDonald majority holds (yet another reason why judicial appointments matter), we’re at the beginning of a decades-long leveling process, and it’s entirely possible that five years from now Meredith Graves will face a very different — and more just — legal landscape, one that truly recognizes the Second Amendment’s place within the Bill of Rights. It’s possible that Ms. Graves’s own case could be the legal catalyst for change in New York. Yet we know the Left will fight every step of the way, seeking not only to imprison Meredith Graves (and others like her) but to convince judges and the public that the Second Amendment — for all practical purposes — does not even exist.
Good points all however, a bunch of liberal politicians (like Shelly Silver) get it. A whole bunch of them rushed in to comment that well, maybe we need to update our laws because...um, well we didn't plan on a law abiding...yada, yada. I think they understand that if Meredith Graves gets to the Supreme Court, NY and NYC gun laws are going down.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe Municipalities DO NOT want Graves in front of a jury.
I would refer to Ron Gibson in Brooklyn, NY, whose case was pled down to a misdemeanor and time served to avoid a jury which likely would have exonerated him and shot a restrictive gun law down.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYour Second Amendment rights don't change much from NYC to LA either. Both areas try to abridge those rights.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYour Second Amendment rights don't change from NYC to LA either. Both cities try to abridge them.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhat is even more hypocritical is the total lack of MSM pundit comparison between the way NYC (and others) treat gun owners, and the New Year's Eve' event in Oklahoma, where a young mother shot and killed a knife-wielding intruder after being on the phone with the 911 dispatcher for 21 minutes. After an addiitional 24 minutes, the police finally arrived. The county sheriff noted that he has 3 deputies to patrol 12,000 square miles.
It should be obvious to all but the most prejudiced or blind of observers that relying solely on police protection would probably have ended tragically for this young woman and her infant. Her ability to successfully defend herself and her child (it's all about the children, right, libs?) against two stronger males rested on her firearm and her willingness to use it with accuracy.
And the left thinks they are ever going to disarm me? Not on this planet.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseMichael Bloomberg should face torture and execution for his crimes against all Americans. Put him down.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseJury fully informed jury and nullification is the first step to sending these bogus laws packing. Once the public understands that we the people do not have to and will not enforce bad laws the laws will be overturned shortly thereafter.
What we also need is for thousands of gun owners from other states to boycott NYC.
In Liberty,
Kitty
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOnce is an accident; twice is a coincidence; the third is 'enemy action'.
External Link
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse