Another attack on the anti-gun bigots

The NRA just filed suit in San Francisco:

The City is being sued by gun owners and gun-advocacy groups because of a local law that says firearms have to be locked up or kept disabled.

The lawsuit, filed in federal court Friday afternoon, challenges a local restriction that forces handgun owners to either store their guns in a locked container or disable them with trigger locks. Mayor Gavin Newsom signed the law into effect in August 2007.

National Rifle Association attorney Chuck Michel, who filed the case, said the locking restriction interferes with citizens’ rights to immediately defend their families.

Plaintiffs include a group of San Francisco gun owners, retired police officers and the NRA.

“These are all people who recognize the right to self-defense is a fundamental civil right that needs to be protected as well,” Michel said.

The suit also tackles The City’s ban on the sale of fragmenting bullets, which break apart upon impact, and names Newsom and police Chief Heather Fong.

Newsom spokesman Nathan Ballard said locking up one’s guns is a matter of common sense.

“If even one life can be saved by this sensible law, it’s worth it,” he said.

Good! Keep attacking. Let’s see how many fronts the Brady Campaign can fight on compared to the good guys. The NRA alone is acquiring 100K new members a month. That doesn’t include CCRKBA, SAF, JPFO, GOA, Calguns, etc.

Mr. Ballard, as Jeff points out, needs to consider the lives lost because of the law as well as the lives saved.


2 thoughts on “Another attack on the anti-gun bigots

  1. Mayor Newsom should consider making San Francisco a pedestrian-only city. Cars kill people all the time there. If only one life is saved, it is worth it.

    Oh, and close all the bars, all the grocery stores, all the buildings, and all the streets. People die every year from demon rum and other drinks, from overeating, from falls in bathtubs and down stairs, and from muggings on streets. If only one life is saved, it is worth it.

    Mayor Newsom epitomizes my idea, that any time a government official opens his mouth, any citizen should be allowed to kick him firmly in the nuts before words come out, just to stop the stupid.

  2. I note that the plaintiffs include retired police officers. Must we conclude then, that the ones in current employ apparently must refrain from speaking out for fear of their jobs? So their Oath of Office is in conflict with local policy? Which will prove most important to them?

    This goes much deeper than a mere lawsuit.

Comments are closed.