Alphecca

One argument used by anti-gunowner advocates is that "one gun a month" is "reasonable."

Another is that "one gun a month" won't affect hunters much because it's "only" handuns.

Yet this article shows these claims as the lies they are:

"Another measure, which passed 41-4, restricts dealers from selling more than one rifle or shotgun to an individual within 90 days."

Rifles and shotguns, and one every THREE months.

What I don't get is why these nuts can't be sued for wasting taxpayer money when they make nonsense like this?
Since this clearly violates peoples civil rights the Justice dept. should arrest and charge them.
Think Bush will? Hah!
Bush could with hold Federal money on the grounds that the Mayor can not be trusted.
The President does have a fiducary duty to the American people.
But then again, Bush took an oath to uphold and defend the constitution but the people of DC still are denied the second amendament right by the DC council and Bush has done exactly zero.
Its BS like this is why I am not a Republican anymore.

Bloomberg's not a Republican folks. Well, he is, but he isn't. He is a life long liberal democrat who couldn't win his parties nomination and so he ran as a Republican (they didn't have anyone running because they are historically so weak in NYC - Rudy excepted) and then played his two democrat opponents against each other.

Seriously, he switched parties when it was obvious he wouldn't even come in the top two of the democrat primary.

As for this plan . . . it won't work. Out of state gun dealers don't have sufficent contacts (or any contacts for that matter) for NYC to assert jurisdiction over them. Its a good publicity ploy for the mayor or what ever idiot pinko proposed it, but its pretty much DOA in court. Basic first week of law school stuff.

Of course, if the gun dealer started advertising in New York and sought to attract New York customers thats a different story. But, since its illegal to sell a handgun to an out of state resident, an Congress has pretty much occupied the field on this issue, NYC isn't going to get anywhere with this.

Well, obviously Bloomberg is just setting up legislation to be used when there's a geological event that moves Virginia within the jurisdiction of NYC (or at least a hunk of it with a few gun dealers attached). It's a pragmatic attempt to wisely take advantage of what would have to be a global cataclysm on the scale of the meteor that killed the dinosaurs. I'm surprised you don't recognize grand strategy when you see it.

As I read this I keep thinking "Half past Claire Wolfe". But then that brings up a whole bunch of other questions. In this case I'm particularily interested in answers to questions 6 and 15. However it does answer questions 4, 17, and 21 rather well.

Psuedo-trackback: It's Up To You, New York

Well, here's my theory. The schmucks sieze the guns of some poor sod who was only defending himself. They trace one of the guns to an out-of-state dealer, and somehow figure out that the dealer sold it, and at least one other gun, to the same person within the 30 days. So they file in their own civil court. Now, the dealer faces the financial burden of having to show up in NY City to fight the suit (despite its being illegitimate, but that's sort of beside the point for this conjecture). Because it's a civil matter, if the dealer doesn't show up, the court will automatically find against it. Since it's NYC, the court will probably find against the dealer anyway. In a civil matter, the remedy will be some amount of monetary damages. If the dealer doesn't pay, the court can put a lien on the business and damage the owner that way, or extort the payment of the fines.

It's all about leverage, Jeff. That's the big hammer that government has over all of us. Many don't have the resources to fight the govt. in court.

What will the reaction of dealers in neighboring state be? If any of them decide they can't take the risk of a successful suit, or afford to fight it, and take steps to limit their sales, then NYC wins.

"When the government fears the people, there is freedom. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny." Wish I could remember who wrote that.

By the way, my using Virginia as an example was a bad one -- I just looked up various state laws to see where I might move to if I really get sick and tired of cold and snow -- and Virginia only allows one handgun purchase per month. So substitute some other state without such a requirement for the purposes of my hypothetical argument...