The group, led by Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry, filed a brief last week in the pending request for residents Romolo Colantone, Efrain Alvarez, and Jose Anthony Irizarry. They argue that not allowing people to transport unloaded guns denies the liberty outlined in the Constitution, and 17 other states’ Attorney Generals have joined the battle.
“The restrictive policies memorialized in New York City’s ‘premises permit’ scheme unduly burdens the Second Amendment rights held by all Americans,” said Landry. “Criminalizing travel with a securely stored firearm creates an imbalance in our federal system that weighs against lawful exercise of the Second Amendment inside and outside of New York City.”
Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Michigan, Montana, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, West Virginia, and Wisconsin have join Landry, and the GOP governors of Mississippi and Kentucky have also signed up.
Reports show that, “Two other briefs have been filed in favor of the plaintiffs by law enforcement lobby groups spearheaded by the Western States Sheriffs’ Association and a variety of pro-gun groups to include Gun Owners of America, Gun Owners Foundation, The Heller Foundation, Conservative Legal Defense and Education Fund, Downsize DC Foundation, DownsizeDC.org, and Restoring Liberty Action Committee.”
“Colantone, Alvarez, and Irizarry are allied with the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association and took city officials to court in 2014, arguing the restrictive license forces gun owners to leave firearms in sometimes unoccupied buildings for long periods of time– such as in cases where they are at another home or out-of-town– and forces them to exclusively use the city’s few ranges, most of which are private clubs with comparatively high fees when compared to ranges outside of the City.”
Such an argument, to many thinking people, seems idiotic, considering that New York doesn’t really have the best safety rate in the country, concerning gun deaths or crime.
U.S. District Judge Robert W. Sweet rejected the case in 2015, and a panel for the 2nd U.S. Circuit this February affirmed his decision.
They said the “restrictions on-premises licenses do not violate the Second Amendment.”
“The panel held that the license holders could always purchase a second gun for a second home or business rather than transport one firearm back and forth and, despite the argument that the in-city ranges were more expensive, they were still locally available to the gun owners and, when traveling outside of the city to shooting competitions, guns can be rented or borrowed for that purpose.”
However, other people argue that the condition ‘shall not be infringed’ is very specific and believe that creating laws that limit the freedom to use a tool is not only outrageous, but completely contrary to the intent of the Second Amendment.
Now that Brett Kavanaugh has been confirmed to the Supreme Court, it will be interesting to see how the legal battle plays out.