The brilliant Gideon John Tucker — it’s way too late to meet him, he’s been dead since 1899 — was an attorney, newspaper editor and politician, and a fellow who must have known people like me, and probably you, were coming.
He knew what would appeal to us when he wrote this in 1866: “No man’s life, liberty or property are safe while the Legislature is in session.” A guy that candid deserves bronze statues in every state capitol building in the country.
Here we are in mid-January, and legislatures are in session in many, if not most, states. The ones controlled by Democrats are already scheming about new gun control legislation. Virginia and Washington come to mind, and Oregonians will have to wait until early next month to see what “gun grabbers,” as they are called by nationally-recognized Second Amendment advocate Alan Gottlieb, have in store after their Measure 114 was declared unconstitutional by a circuit judge.
This time last month, I was reporting the first gun control bills pre-filed in the Old Dominion and the Evergreen State. Virginia Delegate-elect Michael Jones introduced House Bill 12 requiring retail gun sellers, manufacturers and/or importers to supply a locking device with every handgun sold in the commonwealth.
For everyone’s edification, “As used in this section, ‘locking device’ means (i) a device that if installed on a firearm and secured by means of a key or a mechanically, electronically, or electromechanically operated combination lock prevents the firearm from being discharged without first deactivating or removing the device by means of a key or mechanically, electronically, or electromechanically operated combination lock or (ii) a locking mechanism incorporated into the design of a firearm that prevents discharge of the firearm by any person who does not have access to the key or other device designed to unlock the mechanism and thereby allow discharge of the firearm,” the bill states.
Separating common sense from demagoguery, nobody I know thinks it’s a good idea to leave loaded guns just lying around where a kid or burglar might pick one up. Whether people have a gun safe, lock box, cable lock or some other device to secure a firearm not in use, it’s a good thing. But the scenario goes bad when the government sticks its nose into the equation and requires it, typically screwing things up in the process.
Besides, it is arguable that the 2008 Heller ruling made such storage requirement unconstitutional. The District of Columbia had required guns in the home to be unloaded and locked up or kept inoperable and disassembled. The late Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in his landmark majority opinion, “We must also address the District’s requirement (as applied to respondent’s handgun) that firearms in the home be rendered and kept inoperable at all times. This makes it impossible for citizens to use them for the core lawful purpose of self-defense and is hence unconstitutional.”
Permit-to-Purchase
Out in Washington state, where far-left politicians are racing to see which one can get more extreme, they’re looking at a bill to require a permit-to-purchase any firearm. The bill is loaded (no pun intended) and readers in the Northwest can attest to it because this stinker stretches 72 pages.
If this thing passes, it will require a prospective gun buyer to produce a certificate proving he or she has, within the previous five years, taken a “gun safety course” which includes a live fire exercise. As of Jan. 1 this year, gun buyers merely have to show proof of a “gun safety” course, without the shooting sequence. Having been a certified firearms instructor for more than 30 years, I sped through the free online course offered by Sporting Systems in about 30 minutes, and it included watching a video by an attorney discussing use-of-force.
Somebody will certainly sue over this, since the Washington State constitution specifically protects the individual right to bear arms, which “shall not be impaired.” Requiring a permit to exercise a constitutionally-protect right seems like an impairment to me, but I’m just an old country newspaper editor at heart.
Washington wrapped up the year with nearly 700,000 active concealed pistol licenses, which is a jaw-dropping feat considering the state’s recent history of deep blue national voting. Apparently even liberals think their lives are worth protecting.
No Signs Necessary
An interesting thing happened last month in New York, where a federal appeals court panel struck down a gun control requirement that owners of private property open to the public had to actually post signs saying concealed carry is okay on their premises.
This was part of a huge ruling affecting four different challenges to the Empire State’s concealed carry law, adopted after the June 2022 Supreme Court decision scrapping the state’s century-old law as unconstitutional. In Albany, they took this as a dare, so they scrambled to pass an even worse law, and the sign thing was part of it.
The Second Amendment Foundation was actually involved in two of the four lawsuits. The sign challenge was one of them. The other one challenged part of the law restricting concealed carry in places of worship, but lawmakers must have known this was a step too far because they changed the law after the suit was filed. SAF’s Adam Kraut told me this could be considered a victory, because the restriction was removed, which is what the lawsuit was after.
SAF’s Alan Gottlieb has this saying: “Winning firearms freedom one lawsuit at a time.” Add a couple more checkmarks to his scorecard.
‘Lost’ Angeles
Last time anybody checked, SAF was involved in about 55 different legal actions, and one the group filed just before the holidays is kind of interesting.
The group has filed a federal lawsuit against the Los Angeles County Sheriff and California Attorney General Rob Bonta challenging the constitutionality of carry permit issuance policies and laws that make it difficult, if not impossible, for citizens to obtain permits. Don’t see that happening every day.
Joining SAF are the California Rifle & Pistol Association, Gun Owners of America, Gun Owners Foundation, Gun Owners of California and several private citizens. They are represented by attorneys Chuck Michel, Joshua Robert Dale, Konstadinos T. Moros and Alexander Frank, all of Long Beach, and Donald Kilmer of Caldwell, Idaho.
In addition to Bonta, defendants are L.A. County Sheriff Robert Luna, La Verne Police Chief Colleen Flores, in their official capacities, and their respective agencies. The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, according to a SAF announcement.
One thing we’ve all noticed is how people who are vehemently anti-gun don’t go along with court rulings, even by the Supreme Court. Instead, they double down, fighting tooth-and-nail to not comply with a ruling on right-to-carry.
Beats me how such people get elected.
Public Housing Lawsuit
In another legal action, this one in New York state, the Second Amendment Foundation and three private citizens have filed a federal lawsuit against the Cortland, New York Housing Authority.
This complaint alleges the housing authority violates the Second Amendment rights of tenants by prohibiting them from having firearms in their dwellings. It’s not SAF’s first rodeo in this arena, having sued a housing authority in Illinois over an identical gun ban. That case resulted in a permanent injunction for the East St. Louis Housing Authority.