As SCOTUS Hears 2A Case, Bloomberg Reveals Fear of Gun Rights Victory

As SCOTUS Hears 2A Case, Bloomberg Reveals Fear of Gun Rights Victory, Bill-Chizek-iStock-1020504756
As SCOTUS Hears 2A Case, Bloomberg Reveals Fear of Gun Rights Victory, iStock-1020504756

U.S.A.-(Ammoland.com)- Billionaire presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg, the perennial anti-gunner whose vast fortune launched the Everytown for Gun Safety lobbying group, has revealed his genuine fear of Monday’s hearing before the U.S. Supreme Court of a challenge to a New York City gun law in an Op-Ed in which he admits in the second paragraph, “The stakes couldn’t be higher.”

The case is known as New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. City of New York.

Carefully noting the restriction under scrutiny was “enacted by the Police Department” before he served as mayor, he acknowledged his concern that those challenging the New York law that forbade transport of legally-owned handguns outside the city “hope the court will use it as an opening to wipe out basic gun safety laws around the country.”
But Bloomberg fills his piece with rhetoric clearly designed to mislead readers.

He alleges the National Rifle Association could use a victory in this case to “argue that state regulations requiring a permit to carry a concealed firearm are unconstitutional.” There is no evidence to suggest this is the case.

Bloomberg adds, “In Illinois, for instance, local police may object to the issuance of a permit if they know the applicant is a danger to themselves or others. And permit applicants must be 21 years of age or older, possess a valid firearm owner’s identification, take a course involving gun range instruction and pass a marksmanship test.” The argument borders on the absurd and one look at Chicago’s body count clearly makes it so. The people shooting each other and innocent bystanders in the Windy City frequently have criminal backgrounds that preclude them from legally possessing firearms, much less qualifying them for a Firearm Owner Identification (FOID) card and a state carry permit.

He claims the NRA “opposes much-needed fixes to the gun-sale background check system — which are supported by 90% of Americans — as well as restrictions on gun possession for domestic abusers and stalkers.” That’s not true, and as far back as February 2018, NRA’s position on legislation to fix and upgrade the National Instant Check System (NICS) has been public knowledge.

It is only near the end of his 778-word diatribe that Bloomberg candidly acknowledges his intention if elected president.

“As president,” he writes, “I will appoint judges who understand that the Second Amendment allows for common sense limits on gun ownership. I’ve spent 15 years working to build a national coalition that is capable of taking on the NRA and winning — and I’m glad to say that we now have the NRA on the ropes. That may be one reason why the NRA is hoping the court will save it.”

What Bloomberg and his allies in the gun prohibition movement consider “common sense limits on gun ownership” are considered clearly unconstitutional by Second Amendment advocates. The Bloomberg philosophy is to treat the Second Amendment as a second-class right, subject to severe regulation. Bloomberg’s revealing Op-Ed comes on the heels of an alarming Rasmussen/Heartland Institute survey that shows nearly one-fourth of “likely U.S. voters” favor repeal of the Second Amendment, while 66 percent oppose that idea. That’s actually an improvement from March 2018, when a Rasmussen poll found 29 percent of American adults favored a Second Amendment repeal and 56 percent opposed the notion.

In mid-September of this year, a different Rasmussen Reports survey said 75 percent of American adults believe the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to own a gun, while 15 percent disagreed and 10 percent weren’t sure.

Bloomberg acknowledges in his Op-Ed that the New York law created “an unnecessary restriction on gun owners’ ability to visit ranges—and it was rightly rescinded.” But he neglects to explain that the city-backed off only after the case challenging the law had been accepted by the High Court, and it was done specifically in an effort to derail the case. It was a panic effort, and Bloomberg knows it.

The last time the Supreme Court considered a Second Amendment case was nearly ten years ago, in McDonald v. City of Chicago, brought by the Second Amendment Foundation. SAF won that case and in the process, the Court incorporated the Second Amendment to the states via the 14th Amendment. The gun prohibition lobby did not want that case to be decided by the Supremes, either, making Chicken Little arguments that the sky would fall and an affirmative ruling favoring the right to keep and bear arms would bring an end to civilization as we know it.

Monday morning outside the Supreme Court, demonstrators were busy ranting about the case, carrying signs declaring that the “2nd Amendment written before assault weapons were invented,” even though the New York case has nothing at all to do with rifles of any kind. Reuters put their numbers in the hundreds.

Guns have become a cornerstone issue in the 2020 presidential and congressional campaigns. Every Democrat running for the Oval Office has some sort of gun control plank in his or her platform. President Donald Trump, on the other hand, has fulfilled one of his most important campaign pledges, which was to bring balance back to the federal courts, and appoint pro-rights justices to the Supreme Court. The addition of Associate Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh has infuriated and horrified the gun prohibition movement because Republican control of the Senate has made it possible to put conservative judges on the federal bench.

This is one reason why Bloomberg has pushed lots of money into political races, and why he has leaped into the presidential race. His vision for the United States appears to be one where the Second Amendment becomes a government-regulated privilege rather than a protection from government of a fundamental right.


Dave Workman

About Dave Workman

Dave Workman is a senior editor at TheGunMag.com and Liberty Park Press, author of multiple books on the Right to Keep & Bear Arms and formerly an NRA-certified firearms instructor.

21
Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
11 Comment threads
10 Thread replies
1 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
15 Comment authors
NurphPatriot-556ExGobDave Workmanchiefton Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
Notify of
Nurph
Member
Nurph

“Firearm Owner Identification (FOID)”

What sort of British garbage is this?!

ExGob
Member
ExGob

Bloomberg’s two major obstacles in his bid to become POTUS are his stand on the 2nd Amendment and President Donald J. Trump. Even if he gets around the first, he has no chance with the second. I guess he is fortunate that he has plenty of money to waste.

chiefton
Member
chiefton

There is one single firearm law that I would full heartedly support. That is that the duty of the government is to create a list of individuals who are NOT eligible to be armed due to prior convictions, mental illness etc all of which are determined in a court of law using full due process for the individual. Any individual at any given time has the abiltiy to challenge their name on that list. No law should ever be written that creates a blanket infringement on all folks right to keep and bear arms. Only laws that are responsibly directed… Read more »

Patriot-556
Member
Patriot-556

Not a chance. Do you realize the can of worms that would be opened if there was a list of “Prohibited persons”. Last time i checked , the right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. You CANNOT legislate a god given right. There is NO SUCH THING as a prohibited person. Case closed…

StWayne
Member
StWayne

Goonberg of Muscles New York, who would be King of this world because at his heart he’s a tyrant, wants control of everything you have, right down to your very life: to include the lives of your children. If Kim Jong-un of North Korea can do it, if he can wield it, then why not him? This is where you need to be careful of what you ask for when you vote, because you just might get it. And won’t we all be surprised come election day to see what’s inside the box, specially gift-wrapped for the people of this… Read more »

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

@Wayne, If Gloomberg pushes aside the nat. soc. democrats, they are going to revolt. Might split that party forever. More fun to watch than a Clint Eastwood movie.
And Moonberg has more difficulty hiding his distain for us commoners than Hillary did.

AJChwick
Member

Dave, I’m betting SCOTUS ruling on NYSRPA v City of NY will be a very narrow decision. I really can’t see CJ Roberts, J Gorsich (sp?) nor J Kavanaugh opening up a can of beans. Though, I do hope they prove me wrong. On a side note, The NYC Lawyers could have avoided this lawsuit, as they were the wrong Defendant. They truly missed an opportunity. The suit should have been NYSRPA v NYS, as NYS Penal Law preempts NYC Law/Regs, and it is NYS PL400 that defines the Premise License that NYC was/is issuing. NYS issues only two license… Read more »

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

@AJC, That aside is interesting. I did not know that.

CourageousLion
Member
CourageousLion

Thank you NRA for being behind the back door registration scheme called NICS. You see, the FFL tells them that you’re buying a shotgun, pistol, rifle, or “other”. Then he gives them your information including your serial number (“social security number”) as well as other pertinent information. Then he keeps the serial number on the 4473 for as long as he is in business and if he closes the doors he has to turn the papers over to the BATF. Now, SOMONE, please explain to me how this isn’t registering gun owners and their guns??? Sure we can still do… Read more »

Deplorable Bill
Member
Deplorable Bill

Bloomberg the traitor. Bloomberg the tyrant. Bloomberg the one man on earth who knows more than GOD. Bloomberg the man who would be GOD. Bloomberg the fool, a rich fool but a fool non the less. If he thinks that American citizens should be disarmed he should first disband his security detail and visit me at my home. The insanity of disarming America would be all to clear if the military was disarmed, the police were disarmed etc. Money can buy a lot of things but it can’t buy the GOD given rights given to every man on earth and… Read more »

CourageousLion
Member
CourageousLion

I’m praying God gets jealous of Bloomturd and drops a church steeple on his deranged control freak head. Or maybe hits him directly in his noggin with a lightning bolt. Or better yet, sends Ethan Hunt to stick a knitting needle in his temple.

Arizona
Member
Arizona

Per prior SCOTUS rulings, you cannot license an enumerated right. Gun permits, CCW’s and FOID cards are unconstitutional, just like poll taxes. SCOTUS should remind the nation of this fact in the NY case, and change the policy to “strict scrutiny” for all gun laws, a change necessitated by hundreds of minor court decisions ignoring Heller and McDonald precedents and the “history, text and precedent” test Scalia set forth.

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

@Az, True, and what the S. Ct. should do is recognize the preemptive power of the Second Amendment and find that all gun laws are repugnant to the Constitution.

Vern
Member
Vern

Bloomberg and his ilk only see themselves as rulers, not leaders.
They aren’t qualified to be leaders, but their hatred of people makes them qualified to be rulers. Rulers only see themselves as being important, no one else in their eyes have any value at all. To them, people are expendable and that is why he throws his money out there to watch the beggars scramble for it while he laughs at them.

CourageousLion
Member
CourageousLion

“Ruler” = “Psychopathic control freak”

Dubi Loo
Member
Dubi Loo

Maybe Bloomberg would be in favor of limiting the gun ownership of his private security detail? His positions scream “hooray for me and screw you.”

Arizona
Member
Arizona

Any politician pushing “reasonable, common sense gun laws” who has not ALREADY disarmed their own security staff is a hypocrite. Gun control is people control, and everyone with a brain understands that laws simply define criminality, and the consequences for criminal acts; they do NOT prevent crimes. Not a single proposed gun control law would stop mass shooters. They will only turn law abiding citizens into defenseless victims, or criminals who can defend themselves.

jack mac
Member
jack mac

Recognize these gun control laws as acts of oppression. It is inadequate to call these laws people control, they are acts of people oppression.

CourageousLion
Member
CourageousLion

Gun control “laws” aren’t laws and any “law” enforcement officer that is willing to violate his oath and arrest you for violating the “law” should be shot with impunity.

joefoam
Member
joefoam

As per usual Bloomberg displays his ignorance on the subject he spends millions on. If it weren’t for his cash infusion the gun control crowd would wither away. It’s easy for the gun control mob to be passionate about the issue when somebody is paying for your costs. He has been successful in buying what he wants (mayorship of NYC), now he will try to buy the presidency.