As the NRA goes to court again to fight for the unfettered right of anyone who can breathe and lift a gun to own a gun they are joined by nearly half of all state’s Attorneys General, 22 to be exact. The Attorneys General from, Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, West Virginia and Wisconsin have all joined a suit being brought by the NRA before the Supreme Court alleging that a lower court ruling that those under the age of 21 can be restricted from owning a hand gun.
The argument they are making says that these are people who can vote at 18, join the military and purchase long guns including auto loading assault type rifles and should be allowed to also own hand guns if they so choose. They also allege that there is a pattern in the lower courts to ignore precedents set by previous high court rulings and to limit the ownership of guns.
In their petition the NRA says, “This case is part of a pervasive pattern of stubborn resistance to this Court’s holding that the Second Amendment secures a right that is not just individual, but fundamental. As six judges who dissented from the denial of rehearing en banc recognized, it cannot seriously be contended that the panel’s decision is reconcilable with that holding. There is no other fundamental right that could be effectively denied to an entire class of law-abiding citizens on the theory that they are too near the age of legal majority or too ‘irresponsible’ to exercise it. Indeed, there is no other fundamental right that an entire class of law-abiding adult citizens has been denied for any reason at all.”
The Second Amendment another guns rights group has also filed an amicus brief in the case, Alan Gura, an attorney representing them also alleges that the lower courts display a pattern of ignoring Supreme Court rulings where guns are concerned. In his brief he says, “Courts remain largely steadfast in their belief, that the keeping and bearing of arms is less a fundamental right than a social evil. The near-uniform syllogism, played out in countless cases, holds: (1) any firearm, under any circumstances, might be misused; (2) the government has a powerful interest in preventing the misuse of firearms; (3) courts cannot question the government’s assertion that any given law is necessary as a matter of public safety, therefore; (4) any firearm law is constitutional…”
Is this what we really need? A bunch of 18 and 19 year olds running around, doing what 18 and 19 year olds do, namely party until they can’t stand up or see straight and some of them also armed while doing so? It is hard to see why a states AG would consider this petition one that they should be on board with, wouldn’t it make more sense if they were opposing it? Isn’t it their job to lower crime rates, not take legal actions that are certain to raise them?