Posts Tagged fourteenth amendment

FPC Defends Third Grader’s “Come and take it” Hat

From Bearing Arms:

According to a press release, last week the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced their support of a lawsuit against several school officials. According to the FPC, a third-grader’s First and Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated when she was not allowed to wear her “Come and Take It” hat during their annual hat day. 

, , , , , ,

No Comments

New Book Completely Misconstrues The Second Amendment And Race

From Reason.com:

Anderson also gives short shrift to the transformative right-to-arms conversation surrounding the 14th Amendment. Post–Civil War efforts to extend the right to arms were a direct response to racist gun control in the former Confederacy. The debate surrounding the 14th Amendment demonstrates an explicit aim to extend the right to arms, along with other federal constitutional guarantees, to black people. And there is rich evidence that freedmen considered the right to arms a crucial private resource.

, , , , ,

No Comments

The 14th Amendment And Gun Laws

From The Federalist:

On its face, this law clearly violates the spirit of the Second Amendment. Conservatives arguing to overturn it, however, find themselves in the awkward position of arguing against long-standing conservative principles like constitutional federalism and state sovereignty. Implicitly, in this case, the argument for gun rights relies on a century of progressive precedent known as the “incorporation doctrine.”

Activist courts have used this legal theory to impose left-wing policies top-down onto the states. Conservatives are right to insist on a consistent standard; if the Constitution means no school prayer in Kansas, then it also means the right to carry a gun in New York City.

, , , , , , , ,

No Comments

The Effect Of Dread Scott On The New York Gun Case

From The Federalist:

Dred Scott has several implications for the Bruen case. First, it affirms that the Second Amendment right to bear arms is a normal individual right, like the other individual rights listed in the case, such as free exercise of religion, freedom of speech and of the press, jury trial, and so on.

Dred Scott refutes the notion that bans on bearing arms were the norm in the United States (or in any State). According to Dred Scott, American citizens have always had the right “to keep and carry arms wherever they went”—so recognizing blacks as citizens would mean recognizing their right to bear arms.

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Redflags The New Redcoats

From The Truth About Guns:

The First, Second, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments are all impacted by proposed red flag laws. We know what these laws look like. Where implemented, these laws generally allow the removal of firearms from someone’s home, without notice or an opportunity for the gun owner to be heard in court in advance of the removal, based on the allegations of a third party.

, , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Florida College Suspends Student For Range Picture

From Bearing Arms:

The picture wasn’t actually threatening. It wasn’t the kind of pic I personally approve of, really. Muzzle discipline is a thing, after all, but she at least kept the booger-hook off the trigger, which puts her leaps and bounds over some. There was no menace to the picture unless you were actively trying to find it.
So, they suspended her.

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Red Flag Fallout In Colorado

From Reason:

Commonly referred to as a “red flag law,” this type of legislation is part of a state-by-state strategy pushed by gun control activists who were galvanized by the 2018 shooting at Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. Prior to the Parkland shooting, five states had some sort of red flag law on the books; not including H.B. 1177, there are now 14.

, , , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

NY Gun Case Headed To Supremes

From The Atlantic:

It has been 11 years since a 5–4 majority, in District of Columbia v. Heller, announced that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess handguns in the home for purposes of self-defense. It has been nine years since the same majority held in McDonald v. City of Chicago that an identical handgun-possession right is “incorporated” by the due-process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment (which means it applies to states—and cities—as well as to the federal government). The Court in Heller indicated that it was deciding only a narrow question. Justice Antonin Scalia’s opinion cautioned that “nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.”

, , , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

The Gun Protected Blacks When Laws Wouldn’t

From The Federalist:

By the first post–Civil War election in 1868, some southern blacks had begun to arm themselves. In one incident in Tennessee, by brandishing his gun a black man fought off a mob of terrorizing Klansmen who dragged him from his house. “I prevented [one of them] by my pistol, which I cocked, and he jumped back,” the man explained. “I told them I would hurt them if they got away. They did not burn nor steal anything, nor hurt me.”

, , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Gun Control’s Racist Roots

From The Hill:

One month after the Confederate surrender in 1865, Frederick Douglass urged federal action to stop state and local infringement of the right to arms. Until this was accomplished, Douglass argued, “the work of the abolitionists is not finished.”

Kansas Senator Samuel Pomeroy extolled the three “indispensable” “safeguards of liberty under our form of government,” the sanctity of the home, the right to vote, and “the right to bear arms.” So “if the cabin door of the freedman is broken open and the intruder enter…then should a well-loaded musket be in the hand of the occupant to send the polluted wretch to another world.”

, , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

LA Times: Banning Rifles Is Stupid

From the LA Times:

Such bans don’t reduce gun crime, but they do stimulate passionate opposition from law-abiding gun owners: Gun control advocates ridicule the NRA’s claim that the government is coming to take away people’s guns, then try to outlaw perhaps the most popular rifle in the country.

, , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

The Atlantic: Gun Rights Are Racist

The Atlantic:

Public-carry advocates like to cite historical court opinions to support their constitutional vision, but those opinions are, to put it mildly, highly problematic. The supportive precedent they rely on comes from the antebellum South and represented less a national consensus than a regional exception rooted in the unique culture of slavery and honor. By focusing only on sympathetic precedent, and ignoring the national picture, gun-rights advocates find themselves venerating a moment at which slavery, honor, violence, and the public carrying of weapons were intertwined.

The NRA’s response:
The authors of this piece are correct in their sense that our current gun debate has its roots in the 19th-century American South—but they managed to get the true alignment of things completely backwards. It is the modern gun control movement that is absolutely a product of racist legislators trying to deprive black Americans of the ability to defend themselves.

When the Civil War ended and the Reconstruction Amendments freed the slaves and assigned them equal rights under the law, the white landowners at the top of the socio-economic ladder found themselves in a predicament. Not only were they deprived of their resource pool of unfree labor, but they now lived side by side with a black population that outnumbered them—and was about to enjoy equal access to both ballot boxes and firearms. These landowners acted swiftly to defend their dominant position. Encouraging poor whites to cling to a sense of racial identity and despise their black neighbors was part of their strategy. The other part was an explosion of new legislation that spat in the face of the Constitution’s clear intention to guarantee the rights of the former slaves.

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

The 2nd and 14th Amendment Working Together

From The Huffington Post:

Every now and then a case, a law comes into focus to remind us just how far we remain from the dream of equal protection under the law. Such a case appears this week in the State of California where the betters have moved Senate Bill 707 to Governor Jerry Brown’s desk for consideration.

SB 707 is a gun control bill. It is part of a larger strategy of zero tolerance gun control measures with the real aim to trip people up in ways that even the smallest mistake causes them to lose their gun rights. SB 707 adds a new tripwire to the Gun Free Zone laws that surround 1,000 feet around every school in California threatening everyone, even those with a dire need or legal permit, from being within these zones with a gun. Everyone that is, except for the one lobby Sacramento needed to support this law, retired police officers. Even though they are no longer law enforcement officers and do not have any police powers, they will be granted a privilege no other citizen will have in the State of California. Indeed, there are lobbyists that seem to believe that retired police officers are not subject to living among their lowly fellow citizens as equals under the 14th Amendment; that they are better, exempt; that they are not “little people”.

 

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Concealed Carry And Legal Non-residents

From The Washington Post:

A federal district court in North Carolina held Friday that North Carolina may not discriminate against permanent resident noncitizens in issuing licenses to carry concealed guns. (Messmer v. Harrison.) The U.S. Supreme Court’s D.C. v. Heller decision said that general bans on concealed carry of guns are constitutional, because the have been around in many states starting with the early 1800s. But the Supreme Court held that state laws discriminating against noncitizens — even as to activities that aren’t themselves constitutional rights — usually violate the Equal Protection Clause. That seems to be the court’s rationale in this case.

 

, , , , ,

No Comments

NYC Gun Fee “Violates Equal Protection”

From The Gun Mag:

The lawsuit challenges New York City’s $340 fee for a three-year handgun license, which is the highest such fee imposed for a gun possession license anywhere in the United States. SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb noted that the fee anywhere else in the entire state of New York is $10, but the city is exempted from that law, The city’s higher fee, he said, “discourages city residents from exercising their civil rights while violating the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”

, , , , , , , ,

No Comments