Gun Position Strategies Solidifying…?
I saw three pieces this morning, and I thought it would be interesting to look at the strategic intent on the various sides… that is, looking at the tactics to see where the strategy is headed.
Citing the declining number of foreign students coming to the United States, secretary of state John Kerry argued that guns in America are frightening them away. In an interview with CNN’s foreign affairs correspondent Jill Dougherty in Tokyo, Kerry said that Japanese students in particular “think they’re not safe in the United States and so they don’t come.”
Um, okay… way to frighten them more if you’re saying that in Japan. Hey, don’t come to America, we shoot people! Pay no attention to the fact that shootings are declining, we just shoot people! But in this case, we’re into the strategy of, “Blame guns for everything,” so expect that we’ll hear more and more on the Left that guns are the source of all evil. I suppose they need something else now that President Bush has been out of office for nearly five years.
Also at NRO, Robert VerBruggen notes that the Supreme Court has declined to hear a right to carry case that would have implications on different (and dissenting) decisions in lower courts.
As SCOTUSBlog notes, there is a split among lower courts on this issue, so the decision is something of a surprise. Kachalsky is a New York case in which a court upheld restrictions on gun-carrying; in Illinois, Judge Richard Posner found that Supreme Court precedents imply a right to carry.
I’m not all that surprised on this. The court has ruled that there’s a national right to own a gun under the 2nd Amendment, but I don’t think it wants to be in the business of determining how states handle the greater details. I’ve said for a while that I believe the feds will create definitions for firearms and the states will have permission to regulate as they see fit. After that, it’ll be for the people in the states to decide if they’re happy. Judging from the initial reactions, quite a few people aren’t happy in restrictive states, and it’ll start showing in the population transitions as well as in crime rates.
And speaking of how states will regulate, here’s a fine example from Hot Air of NY possibly starting to go after gun owners on paperwork.
Jazz wrote on Saturday about the case of David Lewis, who was ordered to relinquish his firearms because he supposedly once took an anti-depressant, which actually wasn’t the case at all. State police insist that the entire episode was a clerical error, but Lewis’ attorney says this wasn’t just a case of mistaken identity. James Tresmond told NBC affiliate WGRZ that the state of New York is now scouring medical records to find guns to confiscate. When asked for proof, Tresmond says it’s forthcoming, but he’s been hearing this from doctors and law-enforcement officials over the last several days in which he has represented Lewis…
Well, I’ll want to see the proof, but I’m not surprised. The love-of-my-life and I were talking last night about this, and I would expect that many states will start to look for mental health issues and use those as a block to gun ownership. It’s an easy way to respond to all the people (like me) who are calling for more oversight on mental health and claim that they’re doing something about potential violent offenders. This one will be particularly interesting to watch, especially to see how far law enforcement will go to search for reasons to confiscate firearms.
In all, we’re seeing a strong move to the states having the opportunity to build on an anti-gun agenda and use the system to get its way, even as the courts go more hands-off in their approach to the law. It’ll be interesting to watch, though I think in some cases those in the front seats are going to feel pretty uncomfortable about things.