While we’ve all been following the IRS targeting conservative groups, it’s easy to miss the inexorable push for citizen disarmament by anti-rights billionaire zealots like Michael Bloomberg. Currently, Bloomberg’s going after the Senators who voted against the Senate gun ban a few weeks back. He’s been targeting Arkansas Senator Mark Pryor:
New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s gun control group is following through with its pledge to air ads against Arkansas Sen. Mark Pryor, whom Democrats see as one of their most vulnerable incumbents in a tough 2014 climate.
A source tracking media spending told POLITICO the group has bought $350,000 worth of broadcast and cable airtime starting Friday and running through June 6, a crushing amount in a state where ad time is fairly cheap.
Meanwhile, back in the Empire state, there’s a group of sheriffs opposing the Orwellian-named NY SAFE act that makes pretty much all modern firearms illegal and punishable by feeding offenders to the lions.
County sheriffs have asked to join the federal lawsuit challenging New York’s tough new gun restrictions, calling some provisions vague and impossible to enforce fairly.
The New York State Sheriffs’ Association and five individual sheriffs are asking U.S. District Judge William Skretny to add their position to the record. They support gun rights advocates seeking to block enforcement of new bullet limits for magazines and the tighter definition of assault weapons.
The sheriffs agree with the New York affiliate of the National Rifle Association that the law, passed after the Newtown, Conn., school shooting, is unconstitutional because it will prevent citizens from keeping commonly used firearms for home defense.
“The Supreme Court has confirmed that the Second Amendment protects arms typically possessed by law-abiding citizens, and identified that the right of self-defense is ‘core’ protected conduct that is at its zenith in the home,” the sheriffs’ brief said. “At a minimum, laws that criminalize the most common rifle in America today – a rifle that is often selected precisely for its self-defense capabilities – impinge upon that core right. The same is true of laws banning standard-capacity magazines.”
For a brief recap on why the “common use” argument is ultimately anti-rights nonsense, see here. Then again, these sheriffs are trying to avert worse laws, so they’re willing to take back what they can get.
The sheriffs argued that several provisions are also “fatally vague,” measures that “law enforcement officers are inherently unable to fairly and uniformly enforce.” They urged the court to clarify “laws that will inevitably require enforcement, via confiscation, incarceration, or both, against otherwise law-abiding individuals attempting to exercise fundamental rights.”
Kind of a surprise to hear that written by NY sheriffs, but still it’s good to hear.
Colorado sheriffs upset with gun restrictions adopted in the aftermath of last year’s mass shootings filed a federal lawsuit Friday, challenging the regulations as unconstitutional.
The lawsuit involves sheriffs from 54 of Colorado’s 64 counties, most representing rural, gun-friendly areas of the state.
The sheriffs say the new state laws violate Second Amendment protections that guarantee the right to keep and bear arms. Opponents are criticizing the lawsuit as political maneuvering.
Another good start at pushing back against this unconstitutional tyrannical nonsense.
There are still some recall petitions ongoing in Colorado against anti-rights Democrat dictators who suppress any opposition, but it’s not looking rosy.