Liberals turn on New Mexico governor over gun suspension

[Donal]

Originally Posted by Hercules56

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/new...cond-amendment

Albuquerque Sheriff says he will not enforce Governor's order.

Looks like this thing has died a quick death.

There is another governor who fired a prosecutor for simply saying he wouldn't prosecute a case if it came his way, theoretically, regarding reading books to kids. Granted, he also ignored when a sheriff loudly and proudly proclaimed he'd defy a theoretical, in no way actually happening, federal law.

[Hercules56]

Originally Posted by Donal

There is another governor who fired a prosecutor for simply saying he wouldn't prosecute a case if it came his way, theoretically, regarding reading books to kids. Granted, he also ignored when a sheriff loudly and proudly proclaimed he'd defy a theoretical, in no way actually happening, federal law.

In general I support people refusing to follow unconstitutional and illegal orders, but this is a big one. What happens if a sheriff another state refuses to abide by an assault weapons ban or required handgun permits?

[Hercules56]

Originally Posted by dirtywick

it seems you frequently don't pay attention to what other people say

USC is supreme, when state and federal laws are in contradiction. No local or State law can violate constitutional guarantees of Rights.

No State can pass a gun law that violates the Constitution.

[Lurch]

Originally Posted by arthwollipot

An appreciable portion of them are committed by people who stole a gun from someone with a permit.

It stunts my brain functioning trying to grok how it is that tens of millions of people can't make the obvious leap in understanding that the number and ready availability of guns is the problem. The delusional reasoning based on the myth of the "law-abiding gun owner" being a bulwark against the criminal gun owner is breathtakingly insane.

But I guess simple addition is too hard for these fools. And so the only remedy will continue to be the seige mentality. Leading to the continuance of the barking-mad practice of classroom active shooter drills for kindergartners. What other nation does this?! Including the "****-hole" countries the gun nuts fail to realize are still saner and more civilized.

[TurkeysGhost]

Originally Posted by Lurch

It stunts my brain functioning trying to grok how it is that tens of millions of people can't make the obvious leap in understanding that the number and ready availability of guns is the problem. The delusional reasoning based on the myth of the "law-abiding gun owner" being a bulwark against the criminal gun owner is breathtakingly insane.

But I guess simple addition is too hard for these fools. And so the only remedy will continue to be the seige mentality. Leading to the continuance of the barking-mad practice of classroom active shooter drills for kindergartners. What other nation does this?! Including the "****-hole" countries the gun nuts fail to realize are still saner and more civilized.

At least to my estimation, that's the real cultural and political problem at the root of the American gun issue. Plenty of agreement that bad people shouldn't have access to bad guns, but lots of people engage in wishful thinking that this can be meaningfully addressed without preventing good people from accessing good guns.

Often you'll see gun control legislation that falls into this trap, idiotic crap like assault weapons bans or the idea that there's some magic policy that will suss out which potential gun buyers will behave responsibly in the future or not. Very little interest in tackling that the types of guns that people want for noble and legal self defense are also the exact same kinds of guns that are most useful for crime.

[Hercules56]

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/new...nors-gun-order


Now the New Mexico AG wont defend the Mayor. If she is smart she will immediately rescind her stupid action that nobody is willing to enforce.

"I am writing to inform you that my office will not defend your administration in the above referenced cases challenging the Public Health Emergency Order Imposing Temporary Firearm Restrictions, Drug Monitoring and Other Public Safety Measures (the Emergency Order) issued by the Secretary of Health on September 8, 2023," Torrez wrote. "Though I recognize my statutory obligation as New Mexico's chief legal officer to defend state officials when they are sued in their official capacity, my duty to uphold and defend the constitutional rights of every citizen takes precedence. Simply put, I do not believe that the Emergency Order will have any meaningful impact on public safety but, more importantly, I do not believe it passes constitutional muster."

[MarkCorrigan]

You keep quoting fox news. Are you meaning to do that?

[Hercules56]

Originally Posted by MarkCorrigan

You keep quoting fox news. Are you meaning to do that?

Do you doubt the authenticity or accuracy of any of the articles I posted? If so, which one?

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

without the market for legal guns there wouldn't be so many that could be used in crimes.

or suicides

Exactly. Criminals mostly acquire their guns through these methods in this order according to ATF agent Jay Wachtel, an expert on crime gun patterns :

1. straw purchases; having someone by a gun legally for them.
2. legally licensed but corrupt at-home and commercial gun dealers.
3. unlicensed street dealers who get the guns through illegal transactions with
licensed dealers, straw purchases, or from gun thefts.
4. stolen from legal owners.

[Hercules56]

I think the US Constitution is going to quickly win this issue. The Mayor made a stupid choice.

[Donal]

Again with the empty references to the Constitution. It isn't a win-or-lose issue for the Constitution. It is an issue of whether or not the governor 's action falls within her power under the Constitution and Nevada state law.

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by Hercules56

None of these mass-shootings have been committed by someone with a concealed carry permit. Barely ANY of our thousands of murders every year are committed by someone with a concealed carry permit. You're targeting the wrong people.

And yes, the Bruen case finally made it clear that we do have a Constitutional right to protect ourselves in public with a firearm. No special status or situation is required to enjoy that right.

False. From Politifact:

Quote:

The nonprofit Violence Policy Center, which advocates against gun violence, has documented 37 mass shootings that were carried out by people who had concealed carry permits between May 2007 and May 2022, citing media reports.

The Violence Policy Center defines a mass shooting as a shooting that kills three or more people.

According to HandGunLaw.us, TWENTY-EIGHT states have made it legal to conceal carry without a permit, so it would be irrelevant that a mass shooter didn't have a concealed carry permit.

AL, AK, AZ, AR, FL, GA, IN, ID, IA, KS, KY, LA (limited), ME, MS, MO, MT, NE, NH, OH, OK, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, WV, AND WY.

[Hercules56]

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

False. From Politifact:



According to HandGunLaw.us, TWENTY-EIGHT states have made it legal to conceal carry without a permit, so it would be irrelevant that a mass shooter didn't have a concealed carry permit.

AL, AK, AZ, AR, FL, GA, IN, ID, IA, KS, KY, LA (limited), ME, MS, MO, MT, NE, NH, OH, OK, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, WV, AND WY.

Please supply a link for the info from the violence policy center. Thanks.

[Donal]

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

False. From Politifact:



According to HandGunLaw.us, TWENTY-EIGHT states have made it legal to conceal carry without a permit, so it would be irrelevant that a mass shooter didn't have a concealed carry permit.

AL, AK, AZ, AR, FL, GA, IN, ID, IA, KS, KY, LA (limited), ME, MS, MO, MT, NE, NH, OH, OK, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, WV, AND WY.

A point I made a few times already that hasn't gotten through yet.

[Hercules56]

Originally Posted by Donal

A point I made a few times already that hasn't gotten through yet.

This thread is about permits to conceal carry being suspended. New Mexico is not a Constitutional Carry state. Try to focus.

[Donal]

Originally Posted by Hercules56

Agreed. Only a tiny percentage of gun crimes are committed by folks with a permit.

then why did you make that statement?

[Hercules56]

Originally Posted by Donal

then why did you make that statement?

To show that people with gun permits are not the real problem.

[Hercules56]

More Liberals get it right. This is a terrible slippery slope.

https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-...ham-rcna104701

"The point is this: Once we start defending an official’s declaration of an emergency that suspends rights based on his or her values, the slope is slippery and treacherous.

Looking ahead, how much easier would it be for Trump — should he be re-elected in 2024 — to declare a future emergency to justify freezing freedom of the press or free speech rights if he can point to a Democratic governor’s having set the precedent in 2023?

In issuing her emergency order, Lujan Grisham has suspended rights the Supreme Court has declared protected by the Second Amendment."

[TruthJonsen]

I have noticed a phenomenon in governmental and corporate bureaucracies and I wanted to know if it had a name or if any of you had perceived such a phenomenon. I will try to describe it below:

It starts with a problem of some sort. This is usually a problem that is widespread and hard to solve or even manage. The governmental/corporate body focuses, sometimes almost entirely, on the easy, low hanging fruit that presents itself. This fruit only has to be tangentially related in some way to the real problem. This usually involves targeting individuals that follow rules and are already surfaced to the organization, even if that subset is not particularly the problem.

[pgwenthold]

Originally Posted by MarkCorrigan

You keep quoting fox news. Are you meaning to do that?

Don't you know? Fox News is the best place to go to learn what liberals are thinking.

[Beerina]

Originally Posted by arthwollipot

An appreciable portion of them are committed by people who stole a gun from someone with a permit.

Stolen in public from them, or from an empty home where it was left?

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by Hercules56

Do you doubt the authenticity or accuracy of any of the articles I posted? If so, which one?

I doubt ANYTHING comng from Fox News, giving their record of out and outi lying.
If Fox News said the Sun rises in the East and sets in the West, I would keeep awake for 24 hours just to make sure it's right.

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

Exactly. Criminals mostly acquire their guns through these methods in this order according to ATF agent Jay Wachtel, an expert on crime gun patterns :

1. straw purchases; having someone by a gun legally for them.
2. legally licensed but corrupt at-home and commercial gun dealers.
3. unlicensed street dealers who get the guns through illegal transactions with
licensed dealers, straw purchases, or from gun thefts.
4. stolen from legal owners.

I suspect gun are smuggled into the US pretty easily for the black market.
Look if you have enough money and are determined enough, you will always, no matter what laws are onthe books, be able to get a gun. No law is every 100% enforcable. Which does not mean that there should not be restrictions on several types of guns.

[Hercules56]

Originally Posted by dudalb

I doubt ANYTHING comng from Fox News, giving their record of out and outi lying.
If Fox News said the Sun rises in the East and sets in the West, I would keeep awake for 24 hours just to make sure it's right.

Yes, we're all aware.

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by Hercules56

Please supply a link for the info from the violence policy center. Thanks.

Here you go.

https://vpc.org/revealing-the-impact...arry%20permits.

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by dudalb

I suspect gun are smuggled into the US pretty easily for the black market.
Look if you have enough money and are determined enough, you will always, no matter what laws are onthe books, be able to get a gun. No law is every 100% enforcable. Which does not mean that there should not be restrictions on several types of guns.

I agree. No law is 100% enforceable and criminals will always be able to get a gun, but why make it so damned easy for them? Criminals in the UK, Australia, Japan, etc. get guns but we all know the amount of gun deaths there vs. the US.

[Trebuchet]

Originally Posted by dudalb

I suspect gun are smuggled into the US pretty easily for the black market.
Look if you have enough money and are determined enough, you will always, no matter what laws are onthe books, be able to get a gun. No law is every 100% enforcable. Which does not mean that there should not be restrictions on several types of guns.

You know what country has a bigger problems with guns being smuggled in? Mexico. With guns smuggled from the US.

[Hercules56]

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

Here you go.

https://vpc.org/revealing-the-impact...arry%20permits.

Their fact sheet involving mass shootings and concealed Carry permits seems to be broken.

[Hercules56]

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

False. From Politifact:



According to HandGunLaw.us, TWENTY-EIGHT states have made it legal to conceal carry without a permit, so it would be irrelevant that a mass shooter didn't have a concealed carry permit.

AL, AK, AZ, AR, FL, GA, IN, ID, IA, KS, KY, LA (limited), ME, MS, MO, MT, NE, NH, OH, OK, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, WV, AND WY.

The standard claim these days is we have a mass shooting every day. Since 2007 thats say 5,475 mass shootings. 28 mass shootings over that time period is around 1/2 of 1%. Looks like its fair to say that those with a concealed carry handgun permit are in general NOT the problem.

[bruto]

As you've already been reminded she's a governor, not a mayor. The Constitution doesn't just show up at the doorstep and do its thing. Someone makes a complaint, and it gets sent to Federal courts to decide, and then the judgment will be made whether this particular issue violates the second amendment. Eventually, if the issue is not resolved by lower courts, it goes to the Supreme Court and is made the rule for some period which they pretend is forever. I'm inclined to think that the law is doomed, and inclined to agree with many critics that it's an unwise path to be going down, but I don't think it's nearly as black and white as some would have it. There is, I think, some precedent for emergencies curtailing rights that were thought automatic, and there is a precedent for states to write gun laws that are not the same as those in other states, as long as they don't contradict the second amendment, and (once again expecting that the verdict will be negative) there is at least some ambiguity about what the right to keep and bear arms actually entails, both in terms of what keeping and bearing constitute, and of what arms are included.

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by Hercules56

Their fact sheet involving mass shootings and concealed Carry permits seems to be broken.

Try again. Worked for me just now.

[Hercules56]

Originally Posted by bruto

As you've already been reminded she's a governor, not a mayor. The Constitution doesn't just show up at the doorstep and do its thing. Someone makes a complaint, and it gets sent to Federal courts to decide, and then the judgment will be made whether this particular issue violates the second amendment. Eventually, if the issue is not resolved by lower courts, it goes to the Supreme Court and is made the rule for some period which they pretend is forever. I'm inclined to think that the law is doomed, and inclined to agree with many critics that it's an unwise path to be going down, but I don't think it's nearly as black and white as some would have it. There is, I think, some precedent for emergencies curtailing rights that were thought automatic, and there is a precedent for states to write gun laws that are not the same as those in other states, as long as they don't contradict the second amendment, and (once again expecting that the verdict will be negative) there is at least some ambiguity about what the right to keep and bear arms actually entails, both in terms of what keeping and bearing constitute, and of what arms are included.

Supreme Court has made it clear that Americans have the right to defend themselves with firearms. Outside the home. What this Governor has done is a clear violation of our constitutional rights and it will go down in flames. I expect a court injunction within the next week or so.

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by Hercules56

The standard claim these days is we have a mass shooting every day. Since 2007 thats say 5,475 mass shootings. 28 mass shootings over that time period is around 1/2 of 1%. Looks like its fair to say that those with a concealed carry handgun permit are in general NOT the problem.

It was 37 mass shootings, not 28.

Your claim, which I highlighted to make sure you knew exactly what I was referring to was "none of these mass-shootings have been committed by someone with a concealed carry permit." I made no mention of whether or not "those with a concealed carry handgun permits" are the problem. Your highlighted statement was wrong.

Oh, look: FORTY mass shooting in August, 2023 alone. As I already stated, 28 states don't even require a permit to conceal carry...including the FL where Ryan Palmeter shot and killed 3 strangers solely because they were black. He'd even been involuntarily committed for a psychiatric evaluation and still bought a Glock pistol and an AR-style rifle legally. Gotta love it.

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by Hercules56

Supreme Court has made it clear that Americans have the right to defend themselves with firearms. Outside the home. What this Governor has done is a clear violation of our constitutional rights and it will go down in flames. I expect a court injunction within the next week or so.

It's a desperately sad state of affairs when people feel they have to walk around with a damn gun in order to 'protect themselves'. And who do they feel they have to 'protect themselves' from? Other people with a gun. Sheesh.

I need to have a gun!

Why?

To protect myself.

From what?

People with guns.

[Lurch]

Originally Posted by Beerina

Stolen in public from them, or from an empty home where it was left?

Does that distinction really matter if the end result is the same?

[Lurch]

Originally Posted by dudalb

I suspect gun are smuggled into the US pretty easily for the black market.
Look if you have enough money and are determined enough, you will always, no matter what laws are onthe books, be able to get a gun. No law is every 100% enforcable. Which does not mean that there should not be restrictions on several types of guns.

Yet countries which realized that restricting access reduced gun deaths did just that, and enjoyed an immediate and precipitous reduction. In per capita rates, the degree to which the US is an outlier among the civilized world, and a lot of the more 'backward' world, could lead anyone to the assumption that America is a murderous hell-hole.

Why elevate events like 9/11 for remembrance?. The far more sorrowful tragedy is the unremitting harvest in what is effectively a low grade civil war where Americans cull its citizenry to the tune of 10 or more 9/11s or Pearl Harbours annually. With classrooms of gradeschoolers as acceptable and accepted casualties.

That this last category of victim cannot move the nation to acknowledge and step outside its collective barbarity points to a societal sickness, an almost depraved indifference. Guns over children. And the cowardly excuse is the Constitution. As though the 2A is inviolable Holy writ, burned by the very finger of God into a stone tablet. What a shameful lack of imagination. What a deplorable shirking of responsibility toward the most innocent and vulnerable.

[Lurch]

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

It's a desperately sad state of affairs when people feel they have to walk around with a damn gun in order to 'protect themselves'. And who do they feel they have to 'protect themselves' from? Other people with a gun. Sheesh.

I need to have a gun!

Why?

To protect myself.

From what?

People with guns.

Which is why an armed society is not a polite society. It's a paranoid society.

An arms race is no solution.

Even if ALL the guns were owned ONLY by criminals (and law enforcement, of course), it would still be a safer country in terms of flying lead. The criminals would not have as twitchy a trigger finger, knowing the likelihood of Joe Public blasting away is very much reduced. And fewer guns in the general populace leads to the inexorable reduction in accidental shootings, shootings in the heat of the moment and suicide by gun..

The very fact of an armed populace only results in the gun owner having a much higher probability of dying by the gun. Including his own. The fallacy of the gun affording protection is belied by the greater number of deaths such 'protection' does not prevent.

And America, in the same way it obstinately and obstreporously refuses to fully adopt SI, reveals a collective idiocy, at best, in its refusal to recognize the laws of statistics, and in its inability to even perform simple addition. It is blind to the inviolable correlation: More guns = more death by gunfire. There is, on balance, no protection afforded by a gun. It is an implacable tool of the grim reaper. Those whom the gun would protect would as easily be taken.

[Hercules56]

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

It's a desperately sad state of affairs when people feel they have to walk around with a damn gun in order to 'protect themselves'. And who do they feel they have to 'protect themselves' from? Other people with a gun. Sheesh.

I need to have a gun!

Why?

To protect myself.

From what?

People with guns.

Yes it's very sad that some parts of this country has such high crime that people feel the need to protect themselves with a firearm. If we could deal with socioeconomic problems and crime in a much better way we wouldn't have this situation.

But unfortunately in many parts of this country you simply cannot rely on the police to protect you in a moment's notice. The choice is to either accept that you will be a victim, possibly multiple times or try to defend yourself.

[Donal]

Originally Posted by Hercules56

To show that people with gun permits are not the real problem.

And by your own admission, that is irrelevant.

[Hercules56]

Originally Posted by Donal

And by your own admission, that is irrelevant.

If it was truly irrelevant, suspending CCW would be useless and unnecessary.

The Governor's action will be reversed.