Forced into CCW

Moms Demand Action is upset that Texas Senator John Cornyn has pushed a bill for national concealed carry.

They are championing NYC DA Cy Vance and his resistance to this bill.

Vance is against National CCW reciprocity.  Because of course he is.

The NRA and other gun-rights types might see this as payback for the relentless push by New Yorkers like ex-Mayor Mike Bloomberg for tougher gun laws in the rest of the country. In fact, it’s the same thing: a foolish effort to push a parochial set of values into areas where they don’t make sense (at least, not to the people who actually live there).

Let’s remember who Cy Vance is for a moment.  Vance is the DA that has consistently over prosecuted New Yorkers for carrying pocket knives under NYC’s gravity knife law, and is proud of it.

Just look at Vance behind a table of “illegal gravity knives” confiscated under his watch.  All those evil… folding utility knives.  His resistance to reforming NYC’s knife laws so that it stops targeting working class people for carrying the tools they use for work, has earned him the ire of those bulwarks of Conservatism, The Village Voice and The Legal Aid Society.

Vance is a tyrant that enjoys his position as DA, keeping his boot on the necks of New Yorkers.  That is his New York value.  This is keeping inthe tradition of Emperor Governor Cuomo, who stood by Vance and vetoed meaningful knife reform and passed the NY SAFE act in an “emergency” to avoid resistance, enunciated the New York value of  hating, oppressing, an wanted to exile everyone who wasn’t a lockstep Progressive.

“You’re seeing that play out in New York. … The Republican party candidates are running against the SAFE Act – it was voted for by moderate Republicanswho run the Senate! Their problem is not me and the Democrats; their problem is themselves. Who are they? Are they these extreme conservatives who are right-to-life, pro-assault-weapon, anti-gay? Is that who they are? Because if that’s who they are and they’re the extreme conservatives, they have no place in the state of New York, because that’s not who New Yorkers are.

So it goes without a doubt that these tinpot dictators don’t want the Federal Government to force them to expand civil rights for their proles.  A century and a half ago, Democrats like these on the opposite side of the Mason-Dixon stood for exactly the same thing.

This isn’t payback for the meddling of Mayor Bloomberg outside the Five Boroughs.  This is our version of the Voting Rights Act.  When Democrats made voting so difficult for Blacks that their ability to exercise their Constitutionally protected right was in effect denied, the Federal Government stepped in.  Now that Democrats are doing the same thing, by making the ability to keep and bear arms effectively impossible by cost and regulation, the Federal Government once again, has the duty to step in.

In traditional Democrat fashion, MDA supporters immediately jumped on preserving NYC’s hyper-restrictive CCW rules by invoking “states rights.”

To these Progressives, states rights do apply to Constitutional protections like the right to keep and bear arms, but don’t apply to the right to conceal carry a twig and berries into the ladies room.  A Texan can’t carry a gun into New York, but a New York man can carry his package into a Texas girls locker room.

Why?  Because the Constitution doesn’t matter, your rights exist at the whims of Progressives.

The Supreme Court mostly overruled the idea of states rights on the issue of guns in McDonald v. Chicago, which decided:

Justice Alito framed the case as an issue of due process incorporation, i.e., whether the 2nd Amendment is incorporated in and applies to states through the 14th Amendment’s Due Process Clause (slip op., p. 10).  The 14th Amendment states in part that “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty or property without due process of law.” The first clause is generally referred to as the “privileges and immunities” clause; the latter, the “due process” clause. Over the past century, the Supreme Court has interpreted the Due Process Clause to “selectively incorporate various rights.” Incorporation of certain Bill of Rights provisions into the 14th Amendment’s due process guarantee, make these rights enforceable against the states and not just the federal government.

After reviewing various tests and standards that the Court has used in the past to apply the Bill of Rights’ protections to the states through incorporation, Alito concluded that the appropriate test is whether “a particular Bill of Rights guarantee is fundamental to our scheme of ordered liberty. . . [and] deeply rooted in the country’s history and tradition” (ibid, p. 19).

Drawing largely on the historical record and the fact that the majority of states include the right to bear arms in their constitutions, Alito determined that “self defense” is a fundamental right and central component of the 2nd Amendment, and the right to own a handgun is part of this basic right to self-defense. Alito draws on Heller for much of the support behind his reasoning (ibid, pp. 21-26).

The next logical step in this direction is that the Second Amendment, which is an individual right, guarantees the right to self defense outside the home, i.e., guarantees concealed carry.

This is why I have become so supportive of the idea of National CCW to a low standard.  It will allow a NYC and CA slave revolt.  If NYC and CA won’t issue CCW permits to their residents, but a resident of Florida can carry on a trip to NYC, than NYC residents will rush out to get Florida, Utah, and Arizona CCW permits.

In the 1915 landmark film Birth of a Nation, a racist depicts what white Democrats thought giving the right to vote to blacks would look like.

All you have to do is read the MDA posts to see what those same people a century later believe that giving the undesirables the right to carry would do to America.

Uncontrolled bloodshed in the streets, with people shooting each other over every fender bender, committing mass murder and getting away with it by claiming self defense.

It is an eerily similar scene of disarray.

Andrew Cuomo, Cy Vance, Bloomberg, Jerry Brown, and all the supporters of MDA, Everytown, and the rest, are nothing but plantation owners in their own minds.  It is their control over who has what rights that maintains law and order, and when you allow the formerly oppressed to have their rights, they are going to act like savages and destroy society.

Today the difference isn’t quite as clear cut along color lines, but the underlying belief is the same.

A national CCW law is the gun owners Emancipation Proclamation, lifting the boot of Democrat rule off the necks of people in every state where rights are denied.

It should happen, and soon.

2 Replies to “Forced into CCW”

  1. Of note also, the right to firearms outside the home does not even necessarily require support from the 2nd Amendment. All too often we forget about the 9th Amendment. It was long common law that one could carry outside the home, easily provable especially for open carry. The 9th Amendment protects that.




    1



    0
  2. OMG!

    You can’t let people with weapons in NYC.

    The nanny state hoplophobes will scream dire warnings just like they predicted for Minnesota and Wisconsin. They told us it would be,

    Blood in the Streets!
    Wild West Shootouts!
    Gunfights over Parking Spaces!
    Hundreds shot and killed.

    Amazingly, none of that happened. Turns out that people with carry permits are more law abiding than the police.




    1



    0

Feel free to express your opinions. Trolling, overly cussing and Internet Commandos will not be tolerated .