Posted on 01/26/2003 11:17:40 AM PST by freepatriot32
"A new state law requiring what amounts to a 'literacy test' for handgun buyers is a slap in the face to firearms civil rights to the same degree that such tests required of black voters in the South were an attack on their voting rights, the founder of the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) said today.
'On the day our nation celebrates the life of one of the leading civil rights activists of the 20th Century, Dr. Martin Luther King, it is an outrage that California law now treats gun buyers in much the same way that African Americans were treated in the South to prevent them from voting,' said SAF founder Alan Gottlieb. 'The right to own a firearm is no less important than the right to vote. California is treating gun owners like cracker racists treated black citizens in the South during the days of Segregation.'
Literacy tests were outlawed by the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
'Social bigotry against gun owners,' said Gottlieb, 'is just as insidious today as racial bigotry was a half-century ago in the South. Yet, here it is, in all of its raging demagoguery, alive and well in the State of California, fueled with the same anti-civil-rights mentality that is always at the core of discrimination.'"
Under a new California law that took effect Jan. 1, handgun buyers must pass a 30-question "written test" and pay what amounts to a $25 "poll tax" for a five-year Handgun Safety Certificate, replacing the less-expensive basic safety certificate that was good for life. Gone are exemptions for military veterans and Hunter Education graduates. They must also demonstrate their dexterity with the gun, and endure a 10-day waiting period.
"Dr. King reminded us all that a right delayed is a right denied," Gottlieb observed. "Yet California not only delays the right to own a firearm, they charge law-abiding citizens for the 'privilege' of this affront. Regardless how 'easy' or 'hard' the test questions may be, this new requirement amounts to the same kind of literacy test used to intimidate would-be black voters when Dr. King was alive and fighting for their civil rights.
"Anti-gun prejudice in Sacramento is just as wrong as white prejudice was in Selma," Gottlieb added. "Those who hate guns will bury themselves in denial, but hatred is still hatred, whether the target is a black citizen or an armed citizen. How is it, in California and elsewhere, that we renounce one form of bigotry while encouraging another?"
The Second Amendment Foundation is the nation's oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 600,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control. SAF has previously funded successful firearms-related suits against the cities of Los Angeles; New Haven, CT; and San Francisco on behalf of American gun owners. Current projects include several concealed carry lawsuits, a lawsuit against the cities suing gun makers & an amicus brief & fund for the Emerson case holding the Second Amendment as an individual right.
In that case, they should not object to a literacy test for voters.
In California, we have no right to own firearms:
If plaintiffs [gun owners] are implying that a right to bear arms is one of the rights recognized in the California Constitution’s declaration of rights, they are simply wrong.
[California Supreme Court, Kasler v. Lockyer (2000)]
... the Second Amendment does not confer an individual right to own or possess arms...
[Federal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, Silveira v. Lockyer (2002)]
We are working to amend the California constitution to include the right to keep and bear arms for defense of self, family, and home, linking it to the fundamental right to defend life and liberty, protect property, and secure safety listed in the first words of the state's constitution.
We need about 580,000 signatures to put it on the ballot, and in 2000 we collected 650,000.
I was under the impression that owning a gun was no longer a "right" in California.
In any event, it should be obvious that these type of laws are intended to restrain the poor in general and the minorities in specific. 14th Ammendment issues would apply if 2nd Amendment issues did not.
Were the 650,000 on this issue? And what happened to it if so?
Normally, the 14th amendment would cover a citizens rights at the state level, but the USSC never incorporated the 2nd amendment under the 14th. Bottom line: California could ban guns if it wanted to.
That's what I was thinking. But I was more mentioning the 14th in regard to this law since it should be obvious that it is targeting a specific group (minorities) for different treatment than others. That is what the voters rights act of '65 was about. Why is it that only the liberals want to use the 14th?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.