February 11, 2013, 04:34 PM
Another good read for your Monday:
Levy was co-counsel to Heller and this article was published today. It is Mr. Levy's review of the constitutionality of current gun control proposals.
February 11, 2013, 04:47 PM
February 11, 2013, 04:55 PM
Thanks for posting. Good article and comments. Made my day.
Look forward to court challenges of any new gun control laws that get passed.
February 11, 2013, 05:44 PM
Very good read, one I'll be sharing.
I agree with most of what Mr. Levy says, but there are a couple of reasoning errors that should be pointed out:
I'm quoting here from the link posted in post #1, "Reflections on gun control by a Second Amendment advocate, " By Robert A. Levy, which appeared on www.law.com and is dated Feb 11, 2013.
Firearms experts note that murderers can easily load a second or third magazine in a matter of seconds. Accordingly, limiting magazine size to, say, 10 rounds will not have much practical effect. Perhaps so; but that would also mean individuals trying to defend themselves would not be seriously hampered by a 10-round limit. They too could reload very rapidly.
Mr. Levy is missing a couple of key points. 1) When a mass shooter enters a gun-free zone to start popping off rounds, he or she is unopposed, so the couple of seconds he or she requires to swap mags is inconsequential. 2) However, when a person is firing in self defense, he or she is most certainly NOT unopposed; he or she could easily be killed while pausing to reload, especially given that the criminal who initiated the encounter, assuming he or she is also armed, will care nothing about being in compliance the capacity limit law.
...the NRA is less convincing in its opposition to a ban on magazines with 20 or more rounds, a sensibly refined version of the assault weapons ban, and background checks (if they can be completed in no more than 24 hours) on private sales at gun shows.
I disagree here on principle and because of a very practical point. First, on principle, why would 20 rounds be any more sensible, than say, 22? What's magical about a number ending in a zero? Besides, any limitation is an infringement, Heller decision notwithstanding. Second, from a very practical point of view, lets's say Joe and Sam meet randomly at a gun show, and Sam agrees to buy Joe's Glock (or whatever). That Gun show background check (GSBC) law is such a pain in the bootie, they simply decide to adjourn to a nearby parking lot and conclude their transaction off the gun show venue's premises. GSBC circumvented, gun sold. Why bother passing a law that's so easy to beat?
vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.