Parkland Students Tell Supreme Court Gun Violence Is a Youth Epidemic

[ffr]

Source: Miami New Times

Brooke Harrison arrived at school on Valentine's Day 2018 with a backpack full of candy she would never be able to hand out to her friends. By the end of the day, 17 of her classmates and teachers lay murdered on the floors of Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School. When she was finally able to recollect the backpack from her freshman English class, Harrison found it riddled with bullet holes.

In the 22 months since the Parkland massacre, students around the United States have channeled their trauma, anger, and despair into an activist movement that has now reached the nation's highest court. Today, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in NY State Rifle and Pistol Association Inc. v. City of New York, the first Second Amendment case to appear before the court in almost a decade. Among the legal documents presented to the justices was an amicus brief filed by March For Our Lives advising the court on the impact of gun violence on America's youth.

Read more: https://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/parkland-students-share-stories-with-supreme-court-in-new-second-amendment-case-11321692

---

Also titled differently at WaPo

[3Hotdogs]

1. God fuck us all!

THIS Supreme Court ruling on gun rights.

[bucolic_frolic]

2. Good. Time for SCOTUS to figure out kids don't want to be mincemeat /nt

[friendly_iconoclast]

3. They're engaing in pious (if arguably well-meaning) fraud. From their amici brief:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-280/111956/20190812124615502_18-280bsacMarchForLivesActionFund.PDF

From page 26 of the filing (page 32 of the *.pdf file)

Petitioners’ conception of the Second Amendment would close off all space for local experimentation to develop practical solutions that address gun violence. Heller defined a Second Amendment right of “law-abiding, responsible citizens to use arms in defense of hearth and home.” 554 U.S. at 635 (emphasis added).

That right, this Court explained, is “not unlimited.” Id. at 626. Indeed, this Court made clear that the Second Amendment does not include “a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any man-ner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.” Id. But that is precisely the right that Petitioners have asked this Court to create now...

Trouble is, that claim is bullshit, as see:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_State_Rifle_%26_Pistol_Association_Inc._v._City_of_New_York

The gun laws of New York state are generally considered highly restrictive, and New York City's own ordinances on guns are even more restrictive than the state level. Outside of certain professions in which gun ownership is considered a necessity, gun owners in New York City may possess a gun within their home only under a "premises license," and it must be kept unloaded and in a locked container. Further, gun owners may not transport the guns, except directly to and from one of the city's seven shooting ranges. That includes prohibiting the transport of guns to outside the city limits, even to an external shooting range or to a second residence owned by the gun owner. Prior to 2001, the city did offer "target licenses" that would allow owners to transport their guns to authorized shooting range outside of the city, but the city's police found these licenses were being abused, and the city revoked granting these licenses and altered the language of the premises license to emphasize the restriction on travel. Violations of this ordinance could include up to a year in prison.

The New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. and several gun-owning individuals within New York City filed suit against the City in 2013 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York after affirming with the New York City Police that they could not take guns they owned in the city out to shooting competitions in New Jersey nor to homes that they had owned for years. The plaintiffs argued that the City's ordinance violated their Second Amendment rights affirmed by Heller, as well as the Dormant Commerce Clause and the freedom to travel

That's it. No demand for M60s in gun stores, no demand for open carry, not even a demand for an end to gun licenses.

"The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”

George Orwell, 1984

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

4. "a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose."

An amici brief with a big straw man like that? Is there an attorney involved at all or did someone's little brother write this for a junior high class?