Attorneys for the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) have filed a reply brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Calce v. City of New York, a case challenging the city’s ban on electronic arms.
New York City continues to prohibit private citizens from possessing stun guns and similar electronic self-defense devices, tools that are legal and commonly used across much of the United States.
SAF is joined in the case by five individual plaintiffs and the Firearms Policy Coalition, arguing that the city’s outright ban violates the Second Amendment.
“Courts all over the country have struck down bans just like this one as plainly unconstitutional,” said SAF Director of Legal Operations Bill Sack.
“But the District Court in this case found a way to uphold New York City’s ban by improperly placing the ‘common use’ part of the analysis in the plain text portion of the test,” he continued. “This error not only ignores express instructions to the contrary from the Supreme Court but also shifts the burden from the government to prove their ban is constitutional, to the Plaintiffs themselves to prove their arms are protected. That is not the law, and appeal to the Second Circuit aims to correct these errors.”
The reply brief emphasizes that the city’s legal defense misapplies precedent from District of Columbia v. Heller and New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, writing that “The City’s defense of the decision… fundamentally is built on a misunderstanding of where the ‘common use’ principle established by Heller fits into the Court’s clarification and elaboration of Heller’s methodology in Bruen.”
SAF Founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb criticized the city’s position.
“The City’s position here would be laughable if it weren’t so frustrating and people’s safety wasn’t at risk. Their argument fundamentally is that electronic arms like tasers are so ‘unusually dangerous’ that they aren’t even ‘arms’ as contemplated by the Second Amendment, and the legal analysis they propose to arrive at that conclusion is just plain wrong.”
The appeal seeks to overturn the District Court’s ruling and reaffirm that New Yorkers have the same right to possess less-lethal defensive tools as citizens in other states.
*** Buy and Sell on GunsAmerica! ***
Read the full article here
