Tag Archives: Michael Bloomberg

Et tu, Scalia?

Scalia opens door for gun-control legislation, extends slow burning debate

FoxNews.com – July 29, 2012

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia said Sunday, the Second Amendment leaves open the possibility of gun-control legislation, adding to what has become a slow-boiling debate on the issue since the Colorado movie theater massacre earlier this month.
Scalia, one of the high court’s most conservative justices, said on “Fox News Sunday” that the majority opinion in the landmark 2008 case of District of Columbia v. Heller stated the extent of gun ownership “will have to be decided in future cases.”
“We’ll see,” he said.
Scalia’s  comments follow the July 20 massacre at the Aurora, Colo., movie theater in which the alleged gunman, with the help of a semi-automatic weapon and an ammunition clip that could hold as many as 100 rounds, killed 12 and wounded 59 others.
His comments also follow those of lawmakers who have called for tougher gun-related laws in the wake of the shootings – most recently New Jersey Sen. Frank Lautenberg and New York Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, Democrats who said Sunday they will introduce legislation this week to “make it harder for criminals to anonymously stockpile ammunition through the Internet, as was done before the recent tragic shooting in Aurora, Colorado.”
They are scheduled to announce the bill to the public Monday outside City Hall in New York City.
New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, a Republican turned independent, has been among the most vocal on the issue since the mass shooting. …
Congress passed a 10-year ban on assault-style weapons that expired in 2004, but there has since been no real interest among Capitol Hill lawmakers to reinstitute a ban.
On Wednesday, Obama talked about possible changes, but the following day Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said he couldn’t fit the gun control debate into the schedule.
Asked if the Senate might debate the issue next year, Reid said, “Nice try.”
The president was not specific about what measures he’d like to see enacted when he touched on the issue in a speech to the National Urban League. He affirmed his belief in Americans’ right to own guns, but he singled out assault rifles as better suited for the battlefield.
“I believe the Second Amendment guarantees an individual the right to bear arms,” he said. “But I also believe that a lot of gun owners would agree that AK-47s belong in the hands of soldiers, not on the streets of our cities.”
Obama also called for stepped-up background checks for people who want to purchase guns and said he would also seek a national consensus on combating violence.
White House Press Secretary Jay Carney clarified Thursday that the president is not necessarily talking about new laws.
Scalia said exceptions to gun rights were recognized when the Second Amendment was written, including a tort that prohibited people from carrying a “really horrible weapon just to scare people like a head ax or something.”
Republicans have largely said new laws are not the answer. Romney, pressed on the gun control issue in an NBC News interview during his visit in London, said changing laws won’t “make all bad things go away.” “I don’t happen to believe that America needs new gun laws,” he said.
Romney said a lot of what alleged shooter James Holmes did was clearly against the law. “But the fact that it was against the law did not prevent it from happening,” he said.
According to a Gallup poll in 1990, 78 percent of those surveyed said laws covering the sale of firearms should be stricter, while 19 percent said they should remain the same or be loosened.
By the fall of 2004 support for tougher laws had dropped to 54 percent. In last year’s sounding, 43 percent said they should be stricter, and 55 percent said they should stay the same or be made more lenient.
Scalia, in his wide-ranging interview with Fox News also repeated his criticism of Chief Justice John Roberts and the majority opinion this summer that largely upheld President Obama’s Affordable Care Act, particularly the part that called the consequence for non-compliance a tax, not a penalty. “You don’t interpret a penalty to be a pig,” he said. “It can’t be a pig. … There is no way to regard this penalty as a tax.”
~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Politicians slam North Carolina voters


NY Post: New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has told University of North Carolina graduates that last week’s gay marriage vote shows there is still a lot of work to be done for civil rights in this country. Bloomberg spoke Sunday to thousands of graduates at Kennan Stadium.
Bloomberg told them Americans have slowly understood since this country was founded that if the government can deny freedom to one person, it can deny freedom to everyone. The mayor says every generation has brought more freedom to this country, and he expects the latest generation to continue to the work, especially in light of last Tuesday’s vote approving a constitutional amendment banning gay homsexual marriage.
Bloomberg also says the university’s motto, “Light and Liberty,” should be the defining spirit of this century.
Weasel Zippers: North Carolina Gov. Beverly Perdue was in Greenville, N.C., on Friday when she responded to questions from WITN-TV in Washington. She said she was disappointed voters in her state on Tuesday approved a constitutional amendment defining marriage as only between a man and a woman.
“People around the country are watching us and they’re really confused, to have been such a progressive, forward-thinking, economically driven state that invested in education and that stood up for the civil rights of people, including the civil rights marches back in the ’50′s and ’60′s and ’70′s,” Perdue said. “Folks are saying what in the world is going on in North Carolina. We look like Mississippi.”
To Mayor Bloomberg: You know what liberty is? Your right to vote. Why don’t you mind your own New York City business.
To Governor Perdue: You were the idiot that in 2011 recommended suspending congressional elections for the next couple of years. Shame on you for insulting the people who elected you and the State of Mississippi.
How typical of liberals. All for democracy until it doesn’t go their way.
h/t Doc’s Wife for WZ report.
DCG

Please follow and like us:
0
 

There is No First Amendment Without a Second Amendment.

Like AMEX, Don 't Leave Home Without It.

A very timely reminder of just how and where we came from. And the Consequences of ever giving up your second amendment right. Happy 4th Of July, It’s up to us to have many more.  ~Steve~

Reposted From Tea Party Nation.

https://www.teapartynation.com/profiles/blog/show?id=3355873%3ABlogPost%3A1049652&xgs=1&xg_source=msg_share_post

Posted by Alan Caruba on July 2, 2011 at 5:00pm

Send Message View Alan Caruba’s blog

By Alan Caruba

When we celebrate the Fourth of July, let’s keep in mind that the first Americans won their independence from England with the force of arms. It was, in fact, a British effort in 1775 to confiscate military arms they believed were stored in Lexington and Concord, Massachusetts that sparked the war.

The Founding Fathers were so aware of the need for an armed citizenry that, after ensuring freedom of religion, speech, press and the right to peacefully assemble in the First Amendment, the Second guaranteed their right to bear arms.

Wherever authoritarian regimes were established in the last century, they took away this right and then proceeded to kill those deemed enemies of the state.

At this point in American history, the Obama administration constitutes a threat to the Constitution in general and the Second Amendment in particular.
More than 80,000,000 Americans are gun owners.

Two of the organizations that have been fighting to protect these rights are the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA), both led by Alan M. Gottlieb. Three quarters of the SAF budget is devoted to defending rights pertaining to the ownership of guns and to carry them for self-defense.

In March, the Huffington Post had an article titled “Obama Looking for Ways Around Congress on Gun Policy” by Sam Stein. “Faced with a Congress hostile to even slight restrictions of Second Amendment rights, the Obama administration is exploring potential changes to gun laws that can be secured strictly through executive action, administration officials, say.”

Since then we have learned of a U.S. Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms program, Fast and Furious, that actually facilitated the sale and transfer of guns to Mexico. How demented is that?

In May in my home state of New Jersey the SAF won a decision against officials for the deprivation of civil rights under the color of law when they had ruled that an applicant for a concealed carry permit had not demonstrated a “justifiable need” for it. In point of fact, the applicant, Philip Muller, had been kidnapped by members of a motorcycle gang who threatened to kill him. They had, however, grabbed the wrong man.

Despite support by local and state police, action on his application was delayed for six months. Morris County Superior Court Judge David Ironson issued a directive that a permit should be granted. The case is still on-going with other plaintiffs that include a part-time sheriff’s deputy, an applicant who carries large amounts of cash in his private business, and a civilian employee of the FBI with legitimate concerns of an attack from a radical Islamic group.

Currently nearly thirty such cases have either been brought or joined by SAF to stop abuses of this most fundamental right of American citizens ranging from bans on interstate handgun sales, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s imposition of a $340 fee for a permit to keep a handgun in one’s home, and a Chicago ban on gun ranges open to the public. These cases cost between $60,000 and $80,000 each!

The greatest single threat to gun ownership right now is a United Nations “Small Arms Treaty” falsely identified as an “international arms control treaty” allegedly to fight terrorism.”

“In reality,” says Gottlieb, it is “a massive, global gun control scheme. It’s a sham. It’s a fraud.” If the U.S., under the Obama administration and with the consent of the Senate, were to sign on to this treaty, it would nullify the Second Amendment.

Suffice to say that the Obama administration wants to have the power to increase federal fees on guns and ammunition, to ban guns that are imported, to extend the waiting periods for permits, to ban the use of guns on all government property, and even to make it illegal if you own a gun and smoke!

Americans do not have to “justify” gun ownership. It is guaranteed by the Second Amendment. The reality is that enemies of this fundamental rights continue to wage an assault on it.

For information about SAF visit https://www.saf.org/ and CCRKBA at https://www.ccrkba.org/.

© Alan Caruba, 2011

Please follow and like us:
0