Posted by Eugene Volokh:
"No-one Is Trying To Take Away Your Guns":
I've often heard that line from gun control advocates, who are trying
to pooh-pooh people's concerns that some seemingly modest gun controls
are just the prelude to much broader gun bans. Well, here's what the
[1]AP reports reports:
San Francisco supervisors want voters to approve a sweeping handgun
ban that would prohibit almost everyone except law enforcement
officers, security guards and military members from possessing
firearms [I assume they just mean handguns -EV] in the city.
The measure, which will appear on the municipal ballot next year,
would bar residents from keeping guns in their homes or businesses
. . . .
Under the language of the measure, the ban would not apply police
officers, security guards, members of the military, and anyone else
"actually employed and engaged in protecting and preserving
property or life within the scope of his or her employment." . . .
So in Washington, D.C., handguns are generally banned, and people may
not even keep rifles or shotguns loaded and ready for self-defense. In
Chicago, handguns are generally banned. San Francisco is trying to do
the same. And no-one is trying to take people's guns?
Of course, some might argue to pro-gun-rights people living in (say)
Texas or Florida or Virginia, "no-one is trying to take your guns --
only those of people in more pro-gun-control places, like San
Francisco." That, though, presupposes that gun rights activists are
only interested in their own rights. Why should anyone assume that?
I take it that abortion rights activists in California wouldn't be
persuaded by anti-abortion activists' arguments that "Oh, don't worry,
we won't ban abortions in California, since obviously we wouldn't have
the votes; we're just trying to ban them in Texas." Presumably the
abortion rights activists would say that they care about what they see
as the fundamental rights of people all over the country. Likewise, I
would think, with gun rights activists.
(It's possible that courts will conclude that the ordinance is
preempted by state law, as they did with a similar San Francisco
ordinance passed in 1982, and backed by then-Mayor Dianne Feinstein;
but given recent developments in state law, including the upholding of
a West Hollywood ban on sales of so-called Saturday Night Specials,
it's not clear that the courts would indeed do so.)
References
1.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2004/12/16/state0315EST0007.DTL
_______________________________________________
Volokh mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://highsorcery.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volokh
