Gun-Free Zones. Anti-2A activists celebrate them as some kind of “win” in their fight to strip Americans of their Second Amendment rights under the false pretense that Gun-Free Zones save lives. Gun rights advocates know Gun-Free Zones for what they are: easy targets for the sick people who decide to become active shooters.
That, essentially, is what the fight over Gun-Free Zones is really about, and, finally, there is some good news on that front. José Niño writes,
In a ruling made by United States District Judge Leslie Kobayashi, the Hawaii government can’t prohibit individuals with permits from carrying firearms in most parts of the state.
On August 8, 2023, Kobayashi granted the Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) against a law passed as a response to the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen decision made by the Supreme Court in the summer of 2022. This decision deemed the state’s previous restrictions on firearms carry as excessively restrictive.
Similarly, Judge Kobayashi determined in Wolford v. Lopez that the state’s new “sensitive places” restrictions on carrying firearms had no basis in the historical tradition of gun control — a standard that Bruen requires from here on out. In turn, this law violated the Second Amendment.
“[T]his Court finds that the balance of the equities and the public interest weigh in favor of issuing a TRO,” she wrote in the decision. “The public has an interest in preventing constitutional violations, and the State has not established a factual basis for the public safety concerns regarding permit-carrying gun-owners who wish to exercise their Second Amendment right to carry a firearm in public.”
Good for Judge Kobayashi on making this ruling. It’s encouraging when we come across members of the judiciary who remember that their job is to be a judge and not to legislate from the bench.
Of course, having said that, anti-2A activists will continue to to try to shove their delusional views of the world and their bizarrely wrong views on what causes gun violence (they think that it’s the guns and not the shooters) on the rest of us. When that happens, we’ll be able to turn to decisions like this one by Judge Kobayashi to dismantle those attempts to steal Americans’ Second Amendment rights.
And that’s something that we’ll gladly continue to do.
When are the judges going to realize that all gun laws are a violation of the 2nd. Amendment and the 10th. Amendment that states that they are prohibited also , nor prohibited by it ( the Constitution ) to the States, …
Can a law shifting the balance of force in favor of those who do not obey laws benefit the general populace? To disarm criminals and only criminals would have unarguable benefits – but the effect of laws proposed by the Progressives do nothing to inhibit possession by the felons – whose “rights” and freedom those Progressives diligently (and irrationally) defend while burdening the rest of us with our own unarmed self defense. And even persecute us if we factor them out of the equation.
Perhaps if we pushed for a law in all states that would make it a CAPITAL offense if one uses a gun in a crime and wounds or kills someone it would send a clear message. The law should make it clear that accomplices, such as those in a car involved in a drive-by shooting, would face the same consequences if they’re 15 or older.
It’s worse in NY where we can’t buy ammunition!!! Tyrant hochul has to go!!!
As a ” liberative,” I have to agree with Recce’s comment above: make our laws regarding punishment for illegal possession and commission of crime with firearms MUCH MUCH more rigorous and unforgiving. At the same time, I have never considered “shall not be infringed” to be a blank check for things like bump stocks, oversized magazines and other modifications adding to the unnecessary lethality of firearms. I am not anti-2A. I own both handguns and long guns. I just think we need to exercise some common sense.
Comments are closed.