|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
NY: New York Gun Laws Safe From Libertarian Lawsuit
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Dismissing a Libertarian group’s lawsuit, a federal judge found that New York gun-control laws strike an acceptable balance between constitutional rights and the public safety.
Since July 2015, the Libertarian Party of Erie County and nine upstate New York residents have been fighting in a federal court in Rochester, N.Y., to overturn several statues in the penal code related to licensing. The laws state that applicants for a firearms license must be over 21 years old, have “good moral character,” have no history of crime or mental illness, and show no “good cause” to deny the license. |
| Comment by:
xqqme
(1/13/2018)
|
Yes indeed, "prior restraint" on an enumerated Right that "shall not be infringed" is, according to this judge and so many others, an "acceptable balance" between constitutional rights and public safety.
It is interesting, however, that the judge actually acknowledges that the Right exists... a glimmer of hope? |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| There are other things so clearly out of the power of Congress, that the bare recital of them is sufficient, I mean the "...rights of bearing arms for defence, or for killing game..." These things seem to have been inserted among their objections, merely to induce the ignorant to believe that Congress would have a power over such objects and to infer from their being refused a place in the Constitution, their intention to exercise that power to the oppression of the people. —ALEXANDER WHITE (1787) |
|
|
