The City considers live firing-range training so critical to responsible firearm ownership that it mandates this training as a condition of lawful firearm possession. At the same time, however, the City insists in this litigation that range training is categorically outside the scope of the Second Amendment and may be completely prohibited. There is an obvious contradiction here.
Diane S. Sykes
July 6, 2011
Circuit Judge
United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit
RHONDA EZELL, et al., v. CITY OF CHICAGO
[One never hears claims that the anti-gun people are too smart or that their logic is impeccable. It’s nice to see judges and the general public coming to the realization that these guys are mostly nuts and should be treated as such.—Joe]
Is Sykes being coy? I don’t see a contradiction there at all. I see a perfect record of consistency– They’re throwing up any and all barriers to effective gun ownership they think they can justify or get away with at any given time.
As you’ve been saying, it’s like the Jim Crow laws of the past. Don’t want black people voting? Make up a literacy test. Too many passing literacy tests, throw up barriers to education, or print the tests in Chinese. Instate a poll tax. Whatever it takes. That there may appear to be a “contradiction” between requiring literacy and keeping kids out of school is only icing on the cake, as it creates frustration and resignation.
This is why we must never be fooled into thinking they’re being “reasonable” in demanding training, licensing, or any of it. Their one and only motivation is to create the maximum number of barriers, risks and encumbrances to gun ownership and use that are possible in any given political climate. That’s the sum total of all anti-rights organizations. The rest is all subterfuge.