« Notes on Alito and gun control | Main | Another carnival of cordite »
SF gun ban brief
Clayton Cramer has a post on the San Fran gun ban, with a link to a brief filed by Chuck Michel and Don Kates in the matter (caveat: large pdf file). The brief appends a copy of the referendum.... and brother, is it one strange piece of legislation.
1. It bans all transfer of firearms and ammunition (rifle and pistol alike) within the city. This would include transfers by will, etc., so as rifle and shotgun owners die off, their firearms become contraband.
2. It bans handgun possession by residents of the city. A nonresident may still possess a handgun while in town (provided other CA requirements are met).
3. The ban on possession by residents applies to police officers, except when they are actually performing official duties.
4. The ban applies to pretty much everyone else, at all times. Which means it may be difficult to try a case involving a handgun. There is no exemption for court clerks to possess a handgun as an exhibit in a case, or for prosecutors or defense attorneys to pick one up during the trial. (On the other hand, there's probably no such exemption in the drug laws, but attorneys, judges, and jurors regularly "possess" heroin, meth and everything else in the course of a trial).
This is the predictable results of "Inalienable Rights" being subject to "reasonable regulation." It's happened to every one of the ten amendments known as the Bill of Rights.
The US Constitution would NOT have been ratified without the Bill of Rights. They were the dealmaker. Some say, now that the government has proscribed, subscribed, and suppressed beyond relevance the first ten amendements to the Constitution, that the deal is OFF.
I personally think that we have slowly moved into a corporate view of governance, away from the individual rights guaranteed by the original US Constitution, and that this evil will be with us for a very, very long time.