Gun Control ‘Experts’ Panic, Supreme Court Hears 2A Case

Why I Am Suing The Governor of Virginia, iStock-1055138108
As the Supreme Court considers the case challenging New York’s extremist gun permit law, gun control proponents are predicting a downfall of civilization if the court affirms the right to bear arms. iStock-1055138108

U.S.A.-(AmmoLand.com)- As the Supreme Court of the United States begins the long and no doubt intense deliberations on the case of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, gun control proponents are in something of a panic, attempting to portray this case and a potential outcome favoring rights over restrictions as the end of civilization as we know it.

Writing at the New York Daily News, Shannon Watts—founder of the Moms Demand Action gun prohibition lobbying group now a subsidiary of anti-gun billionaire Michael Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety—declares her brand of “gun safety” to be in jeopardy. She breathlessly describes this case as “the latest chapter in the gun lobby’s worn-out playbook of framing every single gun safety law as a constitutional issue, even though the Constitution itself, more than 200 years of history, and courts across the country have already made clear that the government has the right to regulate guns in public spaces to protect people’s safety.”

Watts knows only as much about genuine gun safety as a liberal Hollywood actor, and possibly less.

Almost simultaneously, Adam Winkler writes at the New York Times, “The gun safety movement finds itself on the precipice of disaster.”

Throughout his Op-ed, Winkler repeatedly alludes to a “gun safety movement” and at one spot, calls it the “gun safety reform movement” and he also refers to “gun safety advocates.” Winkler has appeared at the Gun Rights Policy Conference, where he was in a room filled with genuine gun safety advocates; people who own firearms and, unlike a certain movie star, they haven’t fatally shot anybody because they took someone else’s word the gun was unloaded.

Recently, Shannon Lee—sister of the late actor Brandon Lee, who was accidentally killed on a movie set inn 1993—told a reporter, “I think that mandatory gun safety training (should be required) for the actor so that they can check the guns themselves and know how to use them appropriately.” It is a reasonable suggestion from someone who lost a sibling to a terrible, and preventable, accident. Where would someone go for such training? It’s not the kind of instruction offered by anyone in the gun prohibition movement.

  • Question: Who has more certified firearms instructors, the National Rifle Association or the Brady Campaign?
  • Question: Where would you send someone for gun safety training, the Gunsite Academy or the Alliance for Gun Responsibility?
  • Question: Which organization originated hunter education courses in 1949, the NRA or the Massachusetts Coalition to Prevent Gun Violence?
  • Question: Who might be able to more quickly recite the Four Rules of Gun Safety, a member of Moms Demand Action or a member of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms?
  • Question: When police arrest a criminal with a stolen handgun, who thinks the criminal bothered with a background check during the process of obtaining the gun?

In her 700-word opinion piece, Watts alleges the NRA, and by extension, every other gun rights organization, “sees this case as a chance to advance their ultimate agenda of guns anywhere for anyone at any time, with no questions asked.”

Such rhetoric is demonstrably false. Gun rights organizations got behind such legislation as “Three Strikes” and “Hard Time for Armed Crime.” Notably, liberals who advocated for gun control laws hardly warmed up to either movement, which both began in Washington State in the early 1990s.

To his credit, Winkler acknowledges in his article, “While assault rifles look menacing, they are responsible for only a fraction of gun deaths in America each year. While these weapons have been used in some of the most notorious massacres, most mass shootings are actually committed with handguns.”

What must be understood here is that proposed gun bans have little or nothing to do with genuine public safety, but rather to provide a “trophy” of sorts to the gun prohibition lobby. This is why such proposals are generically called “trophy legislation,” something anti-gunners can point to and declare, “Look what we accomplished,” when they really haven’t accomplished anything.

It is patently misleading to identify gun prohibition lobbying groups as “gun safety” or “gun reform” organizations. As recently demonstrated on a movie set in New Mexico, “gun safety” advocates really don’t know about gun safety, and because of that, people can get hurt or even killed.

The Supreme Court will not likely hand down a ruling in NYSR&PA v. Bruen until the final days of its session, next June. A ruling striking down New York’s extremist gun control law would not be a “disaster” as suggested by Winkler, but an affirmation that a fundamental right protected by the Constitution requires no demonstration of “need” to be exercised. No citizen should be required to justify his or her exercise of an enumerated right, which is really what the New York case is all about.

If the Supreme Court nullifies such a requirement, it will be a victory for everyone, not just gun owners and right-to-carry advocates. Such a ruling will remind governments everywhere that rights are sacrosanct, they are special, whether the issue is free speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, legal representation, remaining silent or the act of keeping and bearing arms.

RELATED:


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.

Dave Workman

Subscribe
Notify of
50 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
RenegadeMaddog62
RenegadeMaddog62 (@renegademaddog62)
21 days ago

First of all the 2ND Amendment does not give us the Right to bear arms. What the 2ND Amendment does is protect Our Rights to keep and bear Arms. This is an inalienable Right given by God not man.
Our Forefathers Ratified the Constitution under God. If We The People don’t fight to keep the United States Constitution. We can and will lose it.

KK
KK (@kuetsayahoo-com)
25 days ago

I was disappointed in the response to concerns of “how we are going to regulate “sensitive spaces” – would an unrestricted concealed carrier be “allowed” to go to TIMES SQUARE on New Years Eve? What about a crowded subway? The response should have been: We are not in uncharted waters here – there are numerous unrestricted concealed carriers. Celebrities, retired law enforcement officials, judges, politicians, rich people . . . are they “allowed” in Times Square on New Years Eve? The subway? THE RULES ARE IN PLACE – THERE IS NO NEED FOR CHANGES! This is nothing new – this… Read more »

Last edited 25 days ago by KK
Tank
Tank (@voodoo6actual)
26 days ago

American Psychodrama keeps cycling through because the Deep State Jokers & Jesters kept stoking the fire. It’s gotten beyond stoopid to a feverish pitch & level of irrational gaslighting & agitprop.

Tank
Tank (@voodoo6actual)
25 days ago
Reply to  Tank

True but, when you also consider how many people made the choice under they’re own volition & gave CONSENT to get an experimental VaXX whether it be a doughnut, Big Mac or just to go along, it does make one ponder the cult of ignorance of the masses.

Autsin Miller III
Autsin Miller III (@austin-miller-iii)
25 days ago
Reply to  Tank

I would just remind you that the most searched topic on the internet for the last two years running (or so I have read) is the Kardashians. IF that is true, there is your body of proof with respect to the ignorance of the masses.

incorrigible
incorrigible (@old-fa-man)
26 days ago

“Civiliization as we know it” isn’t all that civil! Wouldn’t be much loss.

Norm
Norm (@nglitz)
26 days ago

I read an hour-by-hour summary of the oral arguments. It seems that they talked about everything but the plain English meaning of the words in the Second Amendment.
Almost every person said the 2A “gave” or “created” the rights to keep and bear.

Arizona
Arizona (@arizona)
26 days ago
Reply to  Norm

Then they are all wrong. We the People prohibited gov from acting against our rights, when we created the gov and granted consent to be governed. The BOR simply identified rights we were removing from the gov’s authority to address.

CaptainKerosene
CaptainKerosene (@jim_macklin)
26 days ago

If a person of almost any age pays attention the can learn how to remove a cylinder from a single action revolver. A 5 second or less job.
Opening a swing-out revolver is even quicker.
Pump and semiautos can be learned quickly too.
One a Thompson that first from an open bolt just removing the magazine ( example. SAVING PRIVATE RYAN ) makes it safe.
Looking at many movies and TV shows it it obvious the guns with blanks are not really pointed at anyone.
First Rule. Take no ones word that a gun isn’t loaded.

Dr. Strangelove
Dr. Strangelove (@dr-strangelove)
26 days ago

NRA? I wouldn’t recommend them for anything until they get their corrupt leadership problems under control.

CaptainKerosene
CaptainKerosene (@jim_macklin)
26 days ago

99.9% of NRA are great.

Stag
Stag (@eriggle83)
26 days ago

Great at negotiating rights away.

Henry Bowman
Henry Bowman (@henry_bowman)
26 days ago

Except they’re enabling the fraud and other corrupt acts by obstinately refusing to defund WLP and his cronies. They simply insist on contributing to Wayne’s Wardrobe and Retirement Fund!

Starve the beast to death, and start fresh.

#NotReallyActivists #NegotiatingRightsAway #FuddsForWayne

Russn8r
Russn8r (@russn8r)
25 days ago
Reply to  Dave Workman

Should we confuse the “troubled leadership” with the turncoat director who put them in place to loot $billions?

“We tried to fire Wayne in ’97. Workman turned coat to block the reform 32-33.”
https://www.ammoland.com/2019/07/shit-storm-todays-nra-heads-need-to-roll/#comment-2765008

“I too served with you in that era, and had forgotten about Workman’s duplicity.”
https://www.ammoland.com/2019/07/shit-storm-todays-nra-heads-need-to-roll/#comment-2766267

And don’t pretend you didn’t know what you were doing. You had the finance committee review.
https://eqs.fec.gov/eqsdocsMUR/00001F57.pdf

Last edited 25 days ago by Russn8r
Tackleberry
Tackleberry (@tackleberry)
25 days ago
Reply to  Dave Workman

Unfortunately, you can’t separate one from the other as long as the header still says “NRA”. While those of us who interact and use the NRA’s program tend to have a deeper understanding of the issues here, the public still only sees the header. The membership failed in their due diligence to keep the ship on course and now it has no rudder and drifting aimlessly.

Autsin Miller III
Autsin Miller III (@austin-miller-iii)
25 days ago
Reply to  Tackleberry

That is very well stated. Thanks for the reminder.

Russn8r
Russn8r (@russn8r)
25 days ago
Reply to  Tackleberry

The membership failed in their due diligence”

The membership? Members trusted directors who claimed to be diligent.

So how about the DIRECTORS, like Workman, who had a LEGAL fiduciary due diligence responsibility, who knew about the corruption, and turned coat to save LaPewCo anyway?

Green Mtn. Boy
Green Mtn. Boy (@reen-mtn-boy)
27 days ago

I listened in on the oral proceedings and the city of N.Y.needs to get a refund of its fees paid to their solicitor.which I hope pretends well for the residents of N.Y. city as well as the health of the second amendment.

JSNMGC
JSNMGC (@jsnmgc)
27 days ago

He doesn’t get it.

JSNMGC
JSNMGC (@jsnmgc)
26 days ago
Reply to  JSNMGC

He (Will/TEX) destroyed the evidence, but what he can’t wrap his head around is that Washington led armed people against the armed government employees of his own country (the redcoats, who enforced intolerable laws making tyranny possible).

Nothing has changed other than now there are many subsets of redcoats. Most will follow almost any order to enforce any law. If they didn’t, there would be very little to worry about.

swmft
swmft (@swmft)
26 days ago
Reply to  JSNMGC

you mean if most law enforcement were those far right white supremacist oath keepers (LtCl Alan West is a member)

JSNMGC
JSNMGC (@jsnmgc)
26 days ago
Reply to  JSNMGC

Your Sheriff is a good example to others.

I hope he holds firm when his office is full of BATFE, FBI, and U.S. Marshals personnel leaning on him (and telling him lies about the people he is supposed to serve).

JSNMGC
JSNMGC (@jsnmgc)
26 days ago
Reply to  JSNMGC

Nice.

That’s the way it should be.

Your community should appreciate your efforts.

Russn8r
Russn8r (@russn8r)
26 days ago
Reply to  JSNMGC

Looks like The Chimp just DVd you 3 times.

Arizona
Arizona (@arizona)
27 days ago

If one is required to apply for a foid card, permit, or license to exercise the right to keep and bear arms, It is no longer a right. How would the left feel and respond if a license, training, background check and annual fee of $250 were required to tweet or post on social media? All gun laws are unconstitutional infringements.

Wild Bill
Wild Bill (@wild-bill)
27 days ago
Reply to  Arizona

Yes, if the government has authority to diminish a Right, even a little, then it is not a Right. A Right empowers us to stop government in its tracks, immediately. The founders knew that Rights are checks on the governments and help balance power in our Constitutional system.

Wild Bill
Wild Bill (@wild-bill)
27 days ago
Reply to  Wild Bill

Just shoot them and keep moving!

Russn8r
Russn8r (@russn8r)
27 days ago
Reply to  Wild Bill

Dear Agent: So now you’re going to lead the revolution? I thought you wanted peaceful legal solutions?

Wild Bill
Wild Bill (@wild-bill)
27 days ago
Reply to  Russn8r

Nothing that I have ever written would lead a rational person to believe that I would lead, but I have participated in combat enough to know that success is based upon surprise, speed and violence of action. There is no time to sit around hanging anyone.

JSNMGC
JSNMGC (@jsnmgc)
27 days ago
Reply to  Wild Bill

It’s going to be ugly, isn’t it? That is – when the redcoats use surprise, speed, and violence of action against patriots.

But the alternative is so appalling it is unimaginable – if the redcoats don’t follow orders, they might lose their government jobs. The horror.

StLPro2A
StLPro2A (@stlpro2a)
26 days ago
Reply to  Wild Bill

Politicians’ heads on pikes lining the DC Reflecting Pond would be an attractive enhancement.

Russn8r
Russn8r (@russn8r)
26 days ago
Reply to  Wild Bill

Evasive as usual, Agent.

Finnky
Finnky (@finnks)
26 days ago
Reply to  Arizona

Yet that is precisely what this case is about. All plaintiffs are asking for is relief from the ‘good cause’ requirement in NY concealed carry license process. When they win, NY residents will see little if any impact. It remains to be seen how many addition road blocks are added to concealed carry. Politicians will point at whatever they do and claim credit for crime not going up after ‘scotus put us all at risk’. We all know licensed carriers will make NY (including NYC) safer – but that is not the story New Yorkers are hearing. i expect licensing… Read more »

Arizona Don
Arizona Don (@arizona-don)
26 days ago
Reply to  Finnky

Arizona was the second state in the US to pass constitutional carry. Arizona was becoming the kidnap and carjack capital of the US. Than the congress passed constitutional carry and the governor signed it into law. Almost overnight crime started down, all crime. That action actually assisted law enforcement by putting more guns in citizens hands. However most blue eastern states do not want to learn such a lesson because it goes against their mind set. Their goal no matter what they say or do is confiscation of all guns. However that is beyond a shadow of a doubt an impossible undertaking and will never happen no… Read more »

Arizona
Arizona (@arizona)
26 days ago
Reply to  Arizona Don

That is my point, SCOTUS should give NY the smackdown, and declare the licensing scheme unconstitutional in full, and declare that any permitting or license system to purchase, own or carry firearms is forbidden. We the People forbade the government from such acts before we created the government. Per the Law of the Land, we can carry whatever bearable arms we like, how we like, and where we like, and the gov has no say about it,

Russn8r
Russn8r (@russn8r)
26 days ago
Reply to  Arizona

SCOTUS should’ve & could’ve stopped the coup d’etat too.

Arizona
Arizona (@arizona)
26 days ago
Reply to  Russn8r

Agreed

USMC0351Grunt
USMC0351Grunt (@gregoryromeu)
26 days ago
Reply to  Arizona Don

…”even though permission slips are no longer required in TEXAS” You may want to double-check your particular circumstances before you assume an all-over blanket policy…

Arizona
Arizona (@arizona)
26 days ago
Reply to  USMC0351Grunt

I utilize my rights under the Constitution to carry concealed and openly here, as everyone should across the country. If everyone exercised their rights, no illegitimate carry laws could be enforced.

Arizona
Arizona (@arizona)
26 days ago
Reply to  Arizona

Will
I get it, I almost got one for that reason, but decided not to.

Russn8r
Russn8r (@russn8r)
26 days ago
Reply to  Arizona Don

Then Vichy ‘Republican’ Governor Doug Douchey collaborated in the theft of the presidency and both US Senate Seats. But AZCDL members think they’re safe in The Shire because they have “con carry” riddled with “gun free” zones, so they refuse to form an election PAC.

States whose entire delegations voted to certify the stolen electors, are suddenly passing “Con Carry”, (phony) 2A sanctuaries with no penalties for violating them, and abortion bans that will probably get the SCOTUS smackdown – tossing meat out when the natives are restless.

Arizona Don
Arizona Don (@arizona-don)
26 days ago
Reply to  Arizona

Absolutely correct I have been an advocate of that for many decades now. Shall not be infringed means shall not be infringed! Not well a small infringement will not hurt anything.  They are all illegal.   There are more then ten thousand gun control laws on the books right now. Most are not even enforced but they remain on the books. Not even one has ever done what it was passed into law for. Because law abiding gun owners are the only ones gun control laws impede. How can a law be expected to influence a person who does not obey laws and has absolutely no respect for… Read more »

Arizona
Arizona (@arizona)
26 days ago
Reply to  Arizona Don

Yup, and I am about sick of it. All these gun laws need to be revoked, from ccw to foid to possession to hughes amendment to NFA and GCA. In debate of the NFA the senate admitted they had no policing authority over firearms. All laws that followed are poison of the same tree.

Arizona
Arizona (@arizona)
26 days ago
Reply to  Arizona

Solutions

We should never purchase any rights, but take them.

Relic
Relic (@relic)
27 days ago

History will never forget the pathetic wimp that wants to take away others rights. Democrats support the communist takeover of this country,they shouldn’t have any say in constitutional matters.

Last edited 27 days ago by Relic
Wild Bill
Wild Bill (@wild-bill)
27 days ago
Reply to  Relic

I hope that History forgets him before he is even out of office.

Russn8r
Russn8r (@russn8r)
27 days ago
Reply to  Wild Bill

Yet you make excuses for Amy Cohen Barrett, Neil Gorsuch & Bret Kavanagh, who voted for the coup d’etat repeatedly.

Russn8r
Russn8r (@russn8r)
27 days ago
Reply to  Russn8r

Boo hoo. 4+ downvotes, you’re still wrong, and I still love the DVs!!! ROTFLMFAO!!!

Threw that last bit in for you low-IQ enforcers. ROTFLMFAO!!!