By Conor Higgins
Last year Washington, DC was told that it could no longer ban its citizens, or any American, from carrying a concealed weapon within the District. DC responded by creating a conceal carry application system the likes of New Jersey and Maryland, meaning, incredibly restricted, and based on the perceived “need” of the applicant. The idea was that if they made the application process grueling, costly, and essentially based on the administrative body’s perception of your “need,” then they would not end up granting many CCW permits.
On May 18, as a result of an ongoing lawsuit against DC for their restrictive application practices (filed by the Second Amendment Foundation), a federal judge issued a temporary injunction stopping the “good reason” practice until the case is resolved. The 23-age decision calls out the law as being too restrictive, and causing undue burdens on the applicants.
This is just one of many cases, and instances, which show that the gun rights camp is winning.
Following Sandy Hook and the Aurora shootings, the nation was swept up in the fever of gun control. Numerous federal bills were introduced to ban “assault weapons” and limit magazine capacities. State legislatures followed suit when they saw the federal efforts failing, and as a result, California, New York, Maryland, Colorado, and Connecticut all enacted tougher gun control regulations. These included redefining “assault weapons,” magazine capacity limitations, expansion of background checks, and the restriction of buildings where weapons could be carried. These efforts also sparked energy into the “gun free zone” argument, resulting in a landslide of legislation.
But could gun control groups have overplayed their hand?
In the years that have followed Sandy Hook and Aurora, gun control groups have made little noticeable headway, and in many cases their progress has been negated by legislative and legal events favoring the gun-rights camp. Many pro-gun states moved to nullify federal gun control efforts, they made it easier to obtain CCWs, and even do away with many “gun free zones.”
By looking at several court decisions over the last few years, one could argue that the very laws enacted in several gun control states, as well as the enhancement of restrictive concealed carry licensure procedures, have actually placed gun control in an incredibly tenuous position.
Last year, the Ninth Circuit court ruled that San Diego’s restrictive “may-issue” practices violated the Second Amendment rights of its citizens. That decision was not put into place, and instead waits the decision of the case after it is heard en banc. The decision by San Diego to hear the case en banc, as well as the decision by DC to establish themselves as a “may issue” state, have placed them, and the entire gun control movement, in peril. If those decisions make it all the way to the Supreme Court, and they lose, then it could mean the end of the ability for any state to remain “may-issue.”
In addition to the San Diego and DC proceedings, the restriction on the interstate sale of handguns was struck down, tearing down a long standing rule that required state residents to purchase handguns within their home state. There are also ongoing lawsuits against the states of New Jersey, New York, and Maryland to repeal their controversial new restrictive gun control laws.
Gun rights gains have not been limited to the court rooms.
As a result of Colorado’s push to enact tougher gun control, two sitting state senators were successfully recalled from office in an effort spearheaded by pro-gun groups.
In response to Colorado’s new ban on “high capacity magazines,” firearm accessories company Magpul pulled up stakes and left for greener pastures in Wyoming and Texas. And they were not alone. Beretta closed their shop in Maryland and moved their factory, and jobs, to Tennessee. Remington moved two of their production lines from New York to Alabama in protest over the SAFE Act, with Kahr Arms and Ruger not far behind.
The massive push to force gun control at the federal level had another unintended consequence, and that is the record number of individuals buying guns and applying for CCWs. According to the Washington Times (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jan/6/boom-for-guns-likely-to-trigger-rush-on-ammo/?page=all) in June of last year, gun sales had skyrocketed. Ammunition shortages were common as individuals bought up everything they could in case of some kind of ban, or law change.
However the most telling piece of evidence is a Pew research poll from last December which indicates that for the first time in twenty years, Americans favor gun rights over gun control (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/01/09/a-public-opinion-trend-that-matters-priorities-for-gun-policy/).
It is possible that following the wake of several national tragedies, that the gun control camp has overplayed their hand. In trying to address issues of gun violence and tragedy, politicians went for what many Americans believe to be the foundation of their civil liberties. Many have even gone so far as to apologize, or even separate from the groups they joined to bolster their efforts. In Colorado, Gov. Hickenlooper admitted that the gun control legislation he supported stepped over the line (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/06/19/colorado-governor-tries-to-apologize-for-gun-control-measures-blames-others-and/). State after state is enacting measures that would either nullify federal gun control, or loosen current restrictions. The courts seem to be agreeing with the gun rights camp, and the courts are exactly where the gun control supporters should not want to be right now.
The feds and gun control supporters pushed too hard, they have swelled the ranks of the NRA, the NAGR, the Second Amendment Foundation, and many other pro-gun groups. They have overplayed their hand, feeding American fear that the government is coming for their guns, and they have done so to the detriment of their cause.
