PDA

View Full Version : Cato Institute: Gun Control After McDonald (mentions Calguns Foundation efforts!)


Liberty1
03-17-2010, 10:37 AM
http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2010/03/10/gun-control-after-mcdonald/



CATO@LIBERTY

Gun Control After McDonald



Posted by David Rittgers

I recently appeared on the Patt Morrison Show in southern California opposite Paul Helmke of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence in a segment that begs the question of what gun control laws will look like if the Supreme Court incorporates the Second Amendment with the McDonald v. Chicago case. The audio of the program is here, but the issue merits a more detailed discussion than I could get into on the radio.

The litigation over the boundaries of the Second Amendment in the District of Columbia previews the kinds of gun laws that will face court scrutiny.

First, certain restrictions on the purchase of firearms will likely be overturned. California maintains a “safe gun roster” of handguns that manufacturers have successfully submitted for safety testing. Following the Heller decision, the District adopted California’s roster. The roster is very specific, and handgun models are certified “safe” right down to the color. The District rejected applications to register two-tone guns, discontinued models, and guns not on the California roster. Three plaintiffs filed suit, alleging that this policy violated constitutional protections against irrational administrative regulations. The District relented, expanding its roster to include the “safe handguns” listings for Maryland and Massachusetts.

California courts are likely to reach similar conclusions. The Calguns Foundation has a plaintiff who wants to register a Glock handgun. The state has certified the right-handed but not the ambidextrous version, and the Calguns plaintiff was born without a right arm below the elbow. This compelling case, along with others parallel to the DC plaintiffs, will force California to open up its roster.

Second, jurisdictions will be forced to allow some form of handgun carry, either open or concealed. Outright bans on concealed carry cited in cases from the mid-1800’s come from a time when it was assumed that only brigands carried handguns concealed, and it was an unquestioned right of the people to carry arms openly wherever they went. States and localities will not be able to delete the right to bear arms from the right to keep and bear arms.

My colleague Tom Palmer is currently litigating this issue in the District of Columbia (complaint here), and states will have to confront the plain text of the Second Amendment and clear historical recognition of a right to be armed outside the home.

California allows open carry as long as the handgun is unloaded, but Los Angeles and other jurisdictions in the state refuse to issue concealed handgun permits. California will probably opt for concealed carry when push comes to shove. Public views have shifted to an “out of sight, out of mind” mentality, and concealed carry is the rule in most states. A California police officer recently put a comment up on Facebook that proposes intimidating open carriers with violence. “Haha, we had one guy last week try to do it! He got proned out and reminded where he was at and that turds will jack him for his gun in a heartbeat!” Turds indeed.

This brings us back to the Starbucks controversy that prompted the radio segment. Gun control proponents asked Starbucks to ban firearms from their coffee shops, and gun rights activists asked that they continue their current policy of following the law of the jurisdiction where each franchise is located.

The call-ins to the radio show expressed a willingness to boycott Starbucks if it keeps its “follow the law” policy, but that’s a rationale to boycott gas stations, grocery stores, and restaurants across the nation. If self-defense scares you that much, the best advice is to stay home. Or venture out and be a good victim.

Callers also expressed concerns about off-duty cops brandishing guns while intoxicated, and this is something we should take seriously. As I’ve said before, no magical powers accrue to a sworn officer. That’s a great case for barring everyone from carrying and drinking in public, law enforcement officers included. Federal law does this – the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act allows current and retired law enforcement officers to carry concealed nationwide but requires that they not be under the influence while doing so. The same can’t be said for some state laws that make law enforcement officers a higher class of citizens than everyone else. Virginia allows retired law enforcement officers from any jurisdiction to imbibe while armed, but citizens with concealed handgun permits must transition from concealed carry to open carry when entering an establishment that serves alcohol for on-premises consumption. Better to treat permit holders and officers alike, and allow carry in restaurants but bar alcohol consumption while armed.

It’s unclear what the patchwork of gun laws across the nation will look like in ten years, but Eugene Volokh gives a framework for analysis in this article. Cato held an event the day before oral argument of the McDonald case, and our brief is available here. Ilya Shapiro and Josh Blackman discussed the application of the Privileges or Immunities Clause in this excellent article, and provided some post-argument commentary.

David Rittgers • March 10, 2010 @ 4:45 pm
Filed under: Law and Civil Liberties
Tags: civil liberties, gun control, Heller case, mcdonald v chicago, mcdonald v. city of chicago, Privileges or Immunities, right to keep and bear arms, second amendment

The Shadow
03-17-2010, 1:18 PM
Good article.

BusBoy
03-17-2010, 1:25 PM
nice article... good to see us in a positive once in a while.

POLICESTATE
03-17-2010, 1:33 PM
That's a great article. Cato gets an A+ for that one.

AndrewMendez
03-17-2010, 1:41 PM
I wonder what the Brady Campaign is up to??? Looking for a new job in Manufacturing firearms?

POLICESTATE
03-17-2010, 1:45 PM
I think the Brady Bunch needs to relax, have a little BBQ, shoot some rounds off at the local range. Sometimes I think that if they just did that, they might realize that guns aren't so bad after all.

Liberty1
03-17-2010, 1:46 PM
for a deeper read they link to Eugine Voloch's law review article:

(about page 70? he deals with carry...)

Implementing the Right To Keep and Bear Arms for Self-Defense:
An Analytical Framework and a Research Agenda
Eugene Volokh*
56 UCLA L. Rev. 1443 (http://uclalawreview.org/pdf/56-5-12.pdf)

FastFinger
03-17-2010, 1:47 PM
Love Cato Inst and like that article! Way to go CGF!

Minor note... I don't like that the author misused the phrase "that begs the question". What should be used is "that raises the question." Begging the question refers to a faulty logical argument akin to circular logic.

Shotgun Man
03-17-2010, 1:56 PM
I wonder why he didn't include the more objectionable part of the EPA cop's facebook comment concerning furtive movements and a two-week vacation.

FastFinger, good obs on the BTQ.

rkt88edmo
03-17-2010, 1:58 PM
Love Cato Inst and like that article! Way to go CGF!

Minor note... I don't like that the author misused the phrase "that begs the question". What should be used is "that raises the question." Begging the question refers to a faulty logical argument akin to circular logic.

Surprised to see that misused here.

FastFinger
03-17-2010, 2:13 PM
Surprised to see that misused here.

It's probably time to stop fighting that particular battle - it appears to be lost. Newspapers, columnists, TV news readers, almost everyone seems to have perverted the use of that term to the point where the bastardized usage is now the accepted one.

Language is living, and definitions evolve.

jdberger
03-17-2010, 2:22 PM
just like "factoid".

POLICESTATE
03-17-2010, 2:29 PM
just like "factoid".

OMG, I hate the idea that some little stupid box with a few bullet points can somehow make someone an authority on the subject. Reminds me of power point presentations at work.

Every report I've sent to an executive I get an email back in less than 10 minutes that says "looks great, can you put that into a powerpoint for me?"

rkt88edmo
03-17-2010, 3:20 PM
It's probably time to stop fighting that particular battle - it appears to be lost. Newspapers, columnists, TV news readers, almost everyone seems to have perverted the use of that term to the point where the bastardized usage is now the accepted one.

Language is living, and definitions evolve.

podium

Shotgun Man
03-17-2010, 3:30 PM
podium

Speaking of language evolving, I don't know what this means.

magsnubs
03-17-2010, 5:25 PM
The use of "podium" begs the question, HUH?

hill billy
03-17-2010, 5:45 PM
With regard to the Brady's, am I the only one who is signed up on their email list so that I can keep them in sight? Keep your friends close and your enemies closer. Even though their emails make me want to vomit.

Stubby
03-17-2010, 7:05 PM
All I can say is....California here we come.....:43:

kcbrown
03-17-2010, 7:10 PM
It's probably time to stop fighting that particular battle - it appears to be lost. Newspapers, columnists, TV news readers, almost everyone seems to have perverted the use of that term to the point where the bastardized usage is now the accepted one.


Yes, but that ... ahem ... "begs" the question of what should be used as a substitute for the old meaning of "begs the question". :D

hoffmang
03-17-2010, 9:59 PM
All I can say is....California here we come.....:43:

You're famous! :D

-Gene

RomanDad
03-17-2010, 10:03 PM
Are you listening Sacramento?

Liberty1
03-18-2010, 1:01 AM
Stubby for Governor!

Stubby
03-18-2010, 6:51 PM
:rofl2:You're famous! :D

-Gene


Better famous for a good cause then infamous for a bad one

Stubby
03-18-2010, 6:54 PM
Stubby for Governor!

Why thank you!! The pay and the prestige would be a big promotion but dealing with professional liers..ah..I mean politicians would be a deal breaker:)

Come to think of it, I am looking to change careers...hmmmm

bigcalidave
03-18-2010, 6:55 PM
Good little article!

quick draw mcgraw
03-18-2010, 8:49 PM
Great article!! It's always refreshing to hear someone speak frankly about our RKBA from a common sense perspective and without ignorance or malice.

Draankol
03-19-2010, 1:14 PM
Good article. Gives hope that change may one day happen. For real.... not like that last batch of dope and mange