Notes From HPS
BY Herschel Smith
11 years, 1 month ago
“So, this is a way to inch things forward on the gun control issue,” she observed. “You go to one of Vermont’s most liberal municipalities and you get a tiny bit, then maybe you inch forward.”
Death by a thousand cuts. And what have I told you about gun politics being local?
Isolate the Insurrectionists by embracing the self-defenders and the sporting gun owners.
Another incremental strategy, similar to the collectivists in Vermont?
John Jay is wondering why anyone associated with the government in Montana (or the feds) would need armored personnel carriers or grenade launchers?
Darryl Cannady in Charlotte, N.C., was pulled by the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police because his car matched a profile description of one they were searching for. The officer unholstered his weapon and held it pointed at Darryl for quite some time. What’s really interesting about this case is the reaction in the comments, which seem to be on the side of telling this kid that racial profiling had nothing to do with it. Get over it, kid. It happens every day. In reality, the officer had no right to unholster his weapon and point it at anyone unless his life was in danger. I can’t do that, you can’t do that, and it would be called brandishing a weapon if we did. Additionally, we would be charged with felony assault for such behavior. But hey, even if the kid was in danger that day, at least the cop got to go home at the end of his shift, right?
|
|
On October 15, 2013 at 4:39 pm, ruralcounsel said:
Maybe something has changed, but as of a year or two ago, the Vermont Supreme Court typically invalidated local or municipal gun laws as being inconsistent and incompatible with state law and the Vermont state constitution. So the incremental approach wasn’t working.
Burlington tried this before, and wasted a lot of taxpayer dollars in litigation.