Quote of the day—Judge Malcolm J. Howard

It cannot be overlooked that the statutes strip peaceable, law abiding citizens of the right to arm themselves in defense of hearth and home, striking at the very core of the Second Amendment. As such, these laws, much like those involved in Heller, are at the “far end of the spectrum of infringement on protected Second Amendment rights.”

Judge Malcolm J. Howard
Senior United States district judge for the Eastern District of North Carolina
March 29, 2012
YOUNG, Defendants.

[This was a ban on the possession of firearms outside the home during a natural disaster or other emergency..

A few years ago the Brady Campaign was claiming a complete ban on firearms was constitutional. Their brief in the Heller case specifically claimed “the Second Amendment guarantees no right to possess firearms unless in connection with service in a state-regulated militia.”

They retreated to a position of advocating severe restrictions carrying guns outside the home. A position they strongly advocated as recently as a couple weeks ago, “Maryland and other states with more restrictive laws have chosen not to make Florida’s mistake. Their choices should be respected by the courts. Nothing in Heller, or in the Constitution, suggests otherwise.”

Now it has now been ruled this infringes upon the very core of the Second Amendment. It was at the far end of infringement.

Also this week the New York Combined Ballistic Identification System was scrapped, “the state has spent $32 million on CoBIS since the creation of the program in January of 2001, and not one crime has been solved with this technology.”

It’s getting difficult to keep up with all the wins we are making.

The options available for the Brady Campaign to have relevance have become extremely narrow and virtually no one listens to them in the small domain they might be able to eke out an existence in.

I think it is Tequila time again for the Brady Campaign and their supporters—if they can afford it.—Joe]

6 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Judge Malcolm J. Howard

  1. …now we just need Alan Gottlieb to focus on his own back yard for a bit and do the same to RCW 43.06.220(e)…

    Would Bateman v. Purdue provide any useful precedent for removing that?

  2. My advice to the Brady Campaign, MAIG, the VPC, and fellow travelers for relevance and to ACTUALLY do something good (i.e. excluding the lighting of candles) about “gun deaths” [useless metric] is to sign up as instructors for the NRA Eddie Eagle program. They would actually provide a valuable educational service.

    They can prefer to remain irrelevant, host pathetic boycotts that do not amount to “budget dust” on the bottom line of their targets, rant and rave, provide false or easily disprovable statistics, and offer all manner of gun control laws that do not influence criminal behavior.

    Here’s a hint. You lost. Millions upon millions of lawful gun owners will not surrender their firearms to make you feel better and address your insecurities. Firearms are a critical reason why America remains free, a Constitutional Republic and not a dictatorship.

  3. Joe, I wish I had a Euro for every time you’ve said how insignificant the Brady Campaign is. If that were true, you wouldn’t spend so much time trying to convince people of it.

    Your quote about infringing upon the rights of folks to defend their “hearth and home,” may work with complete bans. But you guys say the same thing about every restriction regardless of how sensible. The private sale loophole, for example, doesn’t infringe on anything and would obviously prevent SOME bad people from getting guns, or at least slow them up.

    But you won’t have it, will ya?

  4. @mikeb, The Brady Campaign is irrelevant at accomplishing anything political or judicially. That doesn’t mean they still don’t have their supporters in the media. I can do a lot to expose their lies, bigotry, and irrelevence for all to see. My job with them will not be done until the only attention they get in the media is of the same nature as that given to the KKK.

  5. Mikeb, I wish I had a half-ounce of silver for every victory we get in the courts, as well as ounces of silver as measured by “gun-rally attendence”:”ban-rally attendence” for whenever a gun rally goes head to head with a ban rally.

    As for the private sale “loophole”, I would appreciate seeing a demonstration, via some solid statistics, that demonstrate how banning such activity significantly keeps guns out of the hands of criminals, and how this significantly reduces crime–not just gun deaths.

    Oh, and I’ve noticed something interesting: Brady Campaign folk haven’t been making the news (at least, not in Utah on the radio), calling for reasonable gun restrictions, in the aftermath of the latest shooting in California. Why is that? Could it have something to do with the strictness of gun laws in California–which has the highest Brady Score in the nation–and how they did nothing to prevent this situation?

  6. Mikeb, the word “obvious” does not mean what you seem to think it does. It does not mean “another false claim that has been demonstrated to be false but I keep repeating in the hopes of fooling others”.

Comments are closed.