The Bruen Decision is Gun Law Reform

Quote of the Day

That Bruen ruling is going to hurt us for decades to come. It’s going to be the excuse of every conservative Democrat who doesn’t want to pass common-sense gun laws.

Miranda Viscoli
Co-president of New Mexicans to Prevent Gun Violence
March 11, 2023
How This Supreme Court Ruling Is Already Affecting Gun Reform In A Blue State

Interesting title for the article. The Bruen decision is gun law reform.

Her pain is our gain. Of course, she could sell her tears for gun lube and have some gain of her own if she really wanted.


9 thoughts on “The Bruen Decision is Gun Law Reform

  1. New Mexico is one of those states having a post-Bruen temper tantrum. Thankfully the legislative season is short. The NRA state rep is doing a very good job getting alerts out on vote schedules and bill status, as is the New Mexico Shooting Sports Ass’n, and at least several LGS owners are also sending out notices.

    • Sounds like the NRA rep in NM is on top of things and good at getting people organized and active.

      Do you think he/she knows anyone they could send to Florida? Because as I understand it, Moms Demand still outnumbers concerned gun owners at every legislative hearing, which just should not happen, especially not in the “Gunshine State”.

      • Nope, sorry. She came to the local range club’s annual dinner a few years back and spoke. Basically, she’s a one-woman show for the whole state, and I believe one other state, at least at that time.

        Technology helps, but, I was and am very impressed by her dedication and initiative. Among other things she has taken the time to reply back to a reply to one of her mass emails. That alone tells you she’s a special one.

  2. Unfortunately, for every centrist Democrat who sees the error in passing unconstitutional laws, we have multitudes of seething gun haters (like those in Olympia) who will double-down on their stupidity. They figure if they try really really hard, they’ll change the fabric of gun laws and make stuff even illegaller.
    We’re about to suffer a big Bruen tantrum within the next few days, I imagine and Ferguson and Inslee will be doing high-fives with their counterparts in California.

    Me? I’m going to ignore all their histrionics and continue building my own.

  3. “That Bruen ruling is going to hurt us for decades to come. It’s going to be the excuse of every conservative Democrat who doesn’t want to pass common-sense gun laws.”
    Oh, where to start?
    There can be no common sense gun laws. On one hand, gun laws may be common, but they can never make any sense. Just like there is no such thing as gun-crime. As humans are always the one doing the crime.
    And it appears the constitution has little truck with Ms.Viscoli. As she considers Bruen to be a bigger threat to her ignorance than 2A? Truly scary.
    Conservative democrat? (Now we know how these people think woman can become men. And men can get pregnant.)
    Sorry, it might be because I avoid you people like the plague. But you all look the same to me. Communist. You certainly act like communists.
    No democrat has ever conserved anything. And one would be in dire straits to find a conservative that has either.
    But thank you Miranda for adding your name to that long list of people in desperate need of trial date. !8 USC 241 & 242, conspiracy to commit murder, public nuisance, and stupidity. (I know, that last one is just wishful thinking. But we do have the evidence, right?)
    And Miranda, When Gavin Newson gives up on the gun control fight. You might want to consider a different line of work?
    The HR dept. at SVB maybe?

  4. Like everything else from the anti-gun side, she has it exactly backwards.

    Every gun law passed is “gun reform”. There are tens of thousands of pages of “gun reform” currently on the books nationwide.

    Bruen isn’t gun reform; Bruen is a reset.

    Not a full reset to how it should always have been, where “shall not be infringed” means what it says, but a solid step in the right direction.


    To clarify: By “solid step”, I mean that Heller and McDonald were “baby steps”; they decided their respective issues and kinda-sorta hinted at what kinds of laws are consistent with the Second Amendment. Yea, SCOTUS said it, but they beat around the bush, which left gun controllers enough wiggle room to continue passing and enforcing bad laws.

    Bruen dispenses with beating around the bush and bulldozes the damn thing. It explicitly says who has standing (anyone whose protected rights are infringed, no matter how minor), how the Constitutionality test should be done (text, history, and/or tradition, with no means-end reasoning), and what should happen with laws that don’t comply (gone). It’s still not perfect, but it’s certainly no “baby step”.

    What I’d like to see next is Bruen-level reasoning — that rights are rights, that any person facing restrictions has standing to challenge tem, and that means-end reasoning is not allowed — applied to the Fourth Amendment, as it regards the TSA and no-knock raids.

    • Bruen nuked it from orbit.
      I predict that all the major gun control acts, from the thirties, from 1968, 1986, all the minor regulations of the BATFE that never need face a vote of the elected officials who allegedly oversee their overreach, and all the evil regulations of the states, like California’s DOJ Pistols approved for Peons, the AR-15 ban f-up, and the most recent one prohibiting purchase of ammunition by mail will all be gone once the proper plaintiff is found for each one.

      As I predicted after Heller, we can’t expect to go from Plessey v Ferguson to Brown v Board in one fell swoop,we have to nibble around the edges, and grab the low hanging fruit until the who sordid, unconstitutional mess falls to the ground.

      It took 57 years to kill Plessey v Ferguson; it looks like it won’t take as long to eliminate all the abominable Second Amendment infringements. There are many potential pitfalls, so I don’t expect it to happen this year.

      • My concern is that SCOTUS will deny standing and the antis will tie things up in litigation and simply play the long waiting game.

        I figure they’ll do this while they continue to attack / delegitimize the Court in the hopes that we won’t have a conservative majority and Clarence Thomas type jurists forever.

        In my state, the Dems passed a whole bunch of new laws after Bruen came down. They’re essentially proceeding as if Bruen never happened. We’re “may issue” for CCDW and yet our AG issued no statement nor any changes to CCDW here whatsoever.

        Maybe the “no change” is because we’re closer to “shall issue” in practice, but still, you absolutely can be denied simply because some cop, judge, or crazy ex-lover doesn’t like you.

        • I think your concern is valid. I think that is exactly what is going on. Our only hope is to win elections that allow us to hold on to our current SCOTUS advantage over time. We do that by continuing to change into a gun friendly culture.

Comments are closed.