Ah, the Firearms Policy Coalition, one of the most persistent pro-gun organizations out there, one that actively celebrates its lawsuit printer as if it were a physical person and part of the team. It’s glorious.
They also have excellent taste in gun rights writers, so you know they’re awesome.
Anywho, it seems they have an issue in Texas.
In particular, they have an issue with a handful of Texas gun control laws. That’s right, there are gun control laws in Texas, because while it’s pro-gun, it’s not as pro-gun as its reputation might suggest.
Kind of like Florida.
Anyway, the FPC has an issue, and they’re doing something about it.
Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced today that it filed its reply brief with the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in Ziegenfuss v. Martin, urging the Court to reverse the judgment below and strike down three Texas laws that criminalize carrying firearms at certain locations, including racetracks, businesses that derive 51 percent or more of their revenue from alcohol sales, and sporting and interscholastic events.
The case presents an unusual situation: Defendant Texas Department of Public Safety Director Freeman Martin agrees with FPC that the challenged carry bans are unconstitutional, but nevertheless argues that FPC’s lawsuit should be dismissed on jurisdictional grounds, which would allow DPS to continue enforcing bans it still enforces today.
Court-appointed amici Eric Ruben and Gregg Costa defended the bans on their merits, arguing that they reflect a constitutionally permissible “balance” between liberty and security. And amici including Everytown for Gun Safety, the Texas Restaurant Association, the Houston Astros, Houston Dynamo, Houston Dash, FC Dallas, Austin FC, the Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo, Harris County, the Harris County Sheriff’s Office, and Harris County District Attorney Sean Teare all filed briefs essentially arguing that the Court should ignore the Constitution and leave the challenged carry bans in place because of their policy preferences.
In other words, the people who should have stood with gun rights, including some of the organizations most closely associated with Texas in people’s minds, actually want this ban.
Because of course they do.
However, I’m pretty sure that there’s little chance they’ve seen this study that suggests the reason guns are stolen out of cars is often that gun control laws like these exist. Somehow, that probably didn’t make it into the discussion.
The FPC reply builds on the Supreme Court’s recent decisions in United States v. Hemani and Wolford v. Lopez. FPC previously explained that Wolford reaffirmed the “general right to publicly carry arms” recognized in Bruen and emphasized that the Second Amendment protects Americans’ right to carry arms for self-defense as they go about their daily lives, and that Hemani rejected categorical disarmament based merely on the possibility that someone might pose a danger.
“Texas itself says these bans are unconstitutional but wants to keep us out of court so they can keep violating your rights. Gun owners have to be concerned when a state like Texas has a bunch of anti-rights extremists lining up to defend its gun control laws and keep these criminal restrictions in place. Some of these organizations openly argue that their security preference is for the government to flat-out disarm people in spite of our constitutionally guaranteed right to bear arms. But the People’s rights are not subject to veto by Texas bureaucrats or wealthy business owners. The Fifth Circuit must enforce the Constitution and end these immoral bans,” said FPC President Brandon Combs.
That’s what bothers me about Texas here. They admit that the laws are unconstitutional, but they’re still arguing that the laws are constitutional because…reasons?
Yeah, I don’t know what to tell you, folks. This makes no damn sense. Texas DPS says it’s unconstitutional, but they want it and will enforce it just the same. The sports teams would rather see guns stolen out of the parking lot than to allow the most law-abiding group of people out there to be armed inside the stadium, and the anti-gun groups are frolicking in the middle of everything because of course they freaking are.
The truth is that gun-free zones don’t make people safer. If anything, it does the opposite. Not only are guns stolen from cars, but people are vulnerable to and from their vehicle because they’ve been disarmed. Their choice becomes one between taking part in life or maintaining their security, and no one should be forced to do that.
Editor’s Note: President Trump and Republicans across the country are doing everything they can to protect our Second Amendment rights and right to self-defense.
Help us continue to report on their efforts and legislative successes. Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
Read the full article here
