Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.7
Site Design by Sekimori

« DC Circuit upholds dismissal of suit against gun makers | Main | Amici for DC online »

AP on Parker -- gets almost everything wrong

Posted by David Hardy · 11 January 2008 06:19 PM

Story here.

"in which justices will decide whether the Constitution's Second Amendment bars a conviction under tough Washington, D.C. handgun laws."

"The case stems from the conviction of Dick Heller, a 65-year-old security guard who had a permit to carry a handgun at work but was denied a license to keep one at his home in what had been a high crime neighborhood. He kept one anyway. "

"The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed his conviction, saying the city's 31-year-old law against buying, selling or owning an unlicensed handgun was overly broad and offended the Second Amendment's right "to keep and bear arms.""

How does AP make seven errors in a story that is only 11 sentences long? Heller didn't violate the law, wasn't convicted of anything, didn't claim the law was overly broad. And the DC law doesn't allow for licensing of handguns (that was his entire point).

UPDATE: I emailed Alan Gura, Heller's attorney, and he contacted AP. The story has now been greatly rewritten.

It still says district attys from 18 jurisdictions representing a lot of people signed the amicus brief, when it looks to me as if only 2 did. The rest of the locations come from the locations of the private firms that filed the brief as attorneys, not as the actual amici.

I don't have a screencap, but here's the text of the original story:

NEW YORK - Prosecutors from across the country, afraid that an upcoming U.S. Supreme Court ruling could erode state gun laws, on Friday asked the high court to uphold a ban on unlicensed handguns.

The district attorneys, from 18 jurisdictions, weighed in on a case in which justices will decide whether the Constitution's Second Amendment can overrule tough Washington, D.C. handgun laws. The prosecutors say a ruling against the ban could impair law enforcement and jeopardize public safety.

The case is centered on Dick Anthony Heller, 65, an armed security guard who sued after the district rejected his application to keep a handgun at his home for protection.

The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in Heller's favor, saying the city's 31-year-old law against buying, selling or owning an unlicensed handgun violated Second Amendment rights of gun ownership.

The prosecutors, led by district attorneys Robert M. Morgenthau of New York County and Kamala D. Harris of San Francisco, say they worry that what applies in Washington might have an impact on their communities.

Assistant District Attorney Mark Dwyer, head of Morgenthau's appeals bureau, said the high court's review of the Second Amendment will be its first since 1939.

"We would like for the court to reverse the D.C. circuit," Dwyer said, "for them to say there is no individual right to possess a gun, that it (the Second Amendment) enables states to arm militias."

"We hope they don't say anyone can have a gun anytime he wants," Dwyer said.

The prosecutors submitted the papers as a friend-of-the-court brief, filed by parties who are not part of the case but who have an interest in its outcome. The district attorneys, who represent a total of more than 25 million people, come from jurisdictions that include New York, San Francisco, Boston, Dallas, Chicago, Minneapolis, Detroit, San Diego, Oakland and Atlanta.

· Parker v. DC

6 Comments | Leave a comment

djmoore | January 11, 2008 7:40 PM | Reply

Too bad you didn't save a screencap. The article has been substantially revised ("13 minutes ago" as I type) although it is still just as slanted.

DJMoore | January 11, 2008 7:47 PM | Reply

[Um, sorry, meant to poke "Preview".]

[blockquote]Assistant District Attorney Mark Dwyer, head of Morgenthau's appeals bureau, said the high court's review of the Second Amendment will be its first since 1939.

"We would like for the court to reverse the D.C. circuit," Dwyer said, "for them to say there is no individual right to possess a gun, that it (the Second Amendment) enables states to arm militias."

"We hope they don't say anyone can have a gun anytime he wants," Dwyer said.[Emphasis mine.]
I believe several state DAs have joined together to support Heller, although I'm not aware that they've submitted a brief yet.

Oh, and I love this: "The district attorneys... represent a total of more than 25 million people...." You may represent the states they live in, you jackbooted morons, and I'm sure some of them agree with you; but there are many who do not.

Carl in Chicago | January 11, 2008 7:48 PM | Reply

They must have updated the story, as some of the quotes pointed out by David are no longer in the article.

Buffoons...

geekWithA.45 | January 11, 2008 10:16 PM | Reply

>>How does AP make seven errors in a story that is only 11 sentences long?

Once is the sound of spit happening.
Twice is coincidence.
Thrice is enemy action.

Tarn Helm | January 11, 2008 11:34 PM | Reply

I hate the AP.

It has to be under the direct control of George Soros.

straightarrow | January 12, 2008 12:29 AM | Reply

It is an arm of the one worlders.

Leave a comment