As I watched the Rittenhouse and McMichael trial broadcasts, I could not help thinking of a case before the Supreme Court right now, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, in which the petitioners have challenged a 110-year old law that requires New Yorkers to demonstrate proper cause if they want a permit to carry a concealed gun.
It is the first time in over a decade that the court has considered broadening the Second Amendment, and its consequences can be monumental: One in four Americans lives in a place that, like New York, seriously restricts the right to carry a concealed weapon. It tells us why the Rittenhouse and McMichael defenses will continue to matter for public safety across the nation.
As you would expect, this Supreme Court case has generated the usual briefs from gun rights advocates: the N.R.A., gun clubs, libertarian scholars, Republican politicians. What is strange, and disheartening, is that the petitioners have also received support from a group of prestigious and seasoned New York public defenders, who argue that the New York law should be overturned — not really on Second Amendment grounds, but because of the way the law is enforced against their clients, Black and brown, poor defendants who need to carry guns for self-defense.
The public defenders argue that, historically, permits have been issued unevenly, and that still today, in many places, it is easier for whites and members of the middle class to get permits than it is for people of color and the poor. And they argue their clients should have guns just like other Americans do. In other words, the progressive left has met far right in describing dangerous streets and the need to be armed on them.
Theirs is not a legal argument, but a political one, and is unlikely to sway a Supreme Court focused on the text and original meaning of the Constitution (though the court may find it a useful fig leaf if it decides against New York). It is meant to shock, and it does, in its nihilism — a nihilism that echoes the far right champions of the men we have seen on trial.
Instead of taking guns out of the hands of the Rittenhouses and McMichaels of the world, these progressive public defenders want to level “up”— to make guns more readily available to their clients, to all of us. Their vision, if realized, would make the self-defense claims of Mr. Rittenhouse and Mr. McMichael unremarkable, not only in red states, but across the country.
— Tali Farhadian Weinstein in ‘Self Defense’ Is Becoming Meaningless in a Flood of Guns
Allow me to paraphrase the entire drivel above. “oh noes more guns”.
She’s running for Manhattan D.A. :
https://www.taliforda.com/
RE; “What is strange, and disheartening, is that the petitioners have also received support from a group of prestigious and seasoned New York public defenders, who argue that the New York law should be overturned — not really on Second Amendment grounds, but because of the way the law is enforced against their clients, Black and brown, poor defendants who need to carry guns for self-defense.”
What the writer tali farhadian weinstein fails to see are defenders switching direction over the fact that History Confirms Gun Control in any shape, matter or form is a racist and nazi based agenda.
I ask the writer…How would they feel is they were Black and their Gun Control public defender had a noose and swastika hanging on the office wall? Any American listening to a Gun Control zealot should see nooses, swastikas and other diabolical baggage that is rooted in Gun Control and react accordingly.
The writer tali farhadian feinstein also assumes mixing Kyle Rittenhouse in with mcmichael is going to sell. The cases are as different as night and day as were the decisions of the juries and the vast majority of America. Instead of beating around the bush the writer needs to be honest and say they are upset because their losing view circles around their personal disdain for firearms and their desire to see Gun Control.
“is a racist and nazi based agenda”
boolshevik. boolshevik thing.
Embrace the power of both/and. Totalitarians always disarm the people they intend to victimize and rule over.
Nazis disarmed the Jews. Bolshevik Soviet Jews disarmed the kulaks. We all know what happened next in both cases. This is why, in America, we refuse to go along with the disarming thing. And we shoot totalitarians.
she’s been laid off for two months, the previous month her paycheck was $20328 ONLY working at home for a couple of hours each day…
check out… GoogleJoin1
Wanting to ensure your life survives and continues in the face of assault is nihilism.
Burning down city blocks because the TV told you something, somewhere was unfair is not nihilism.
Got it.
Exactly. Self-defense is the polar opposite of nihilism. This lady is either very stupid, very ill-informed, or a very evil liar.
Wait, no…embrace the power of both/and. She could be all three. (So of course she’s running for district attorney in NYC.)
“It tells us why the Rittenhouse and McMichael defenses will continue to matter for public safety”
Drawing an equivalency between the Rittenhouse and McMichael cases = permanent loss of any and all credibility you *might* have had.
Go pound sand, Tali.
The cases are interchangeable in their minds.
Our worst enemy is the 2A community. I can’t believe this board won’t the men who defended themselves against a violent, mentally ill criminal fake jogger while legally open carrying.
I am absolutely disgusted with POTG. They just believe whatever the TV tells them and will throw their own under the bus to show the libs how they aren’t racists.
You forgot your sarcasm tag .
“believe whatever the TV tells them”
I didn’t follow the McMichael case, but I know enough about it to know that it’s very different from the Rittenhouse case. Rittenhouse was running away from a mob that was saying kill him. That’s not to say you aren’t allowed to stand your ground, but the cases are very different. You seem to be equating them as well. Nuance matters. Promoting the idea that these cases are the same is flat out propaganda.
Are you a retard there was no proof that Aubery did anything but look at a construction site which I do often its interesting looking how they’re putting things up second if a man with a shotgun and somebody in the back of their bed with a pistols chasing me down the f****** Street you better bet your ass I’m gunna be lighting them up they do not get to chase down and kill people just cuz you think they did something no self defense they chased him until there was a point where he had to make a decision where they trapped him and corned him into having to put up a fight for the gun I for one will not be at the mercy of insane people chasing you down the street
better get some shoes then, lucy.
Regardless of whether you agree with the verdict of the McMichael case, there should be no disagreement that the facts of the cases and the situation surrounding them are very different between the McMichaels and Rittenhouse.
I intended to say just that very thing. Thanks for being first.
Also, Tali pretends that gun laws aren’t racially motivated? Let me repeat myself yet again: Every gun law prior to the US independence was unapologetically racist. Almost ever gun law written since 1776 has been racist as well, but some of them sorta kinda apologize for the racism while still being used to keep the darkies on the plantation.
Gun laws are racist, and so are all the politicians who run on gun control platforms.
I guess she thinks that any person carrying a firearm has no right of self defense. Typical new yawker. The Constitution doesn’t matter, only that there be fewer guns on the street(even if it is almost entirely criminals who are carrying them, along with all the other people too afraid not to).
I don’t recall any language in the 2nd amendment restricting it white people or the middle class and above. It applies to every citizen of the US, clearly and completely. The decent portion of the poor and minorities living in dangerous areas absolutely have more need to arm themselves than the middle and upper classes who live in safer areas and can afford other forms of security. The people who are not decent, in all races and classes arm themselves regardless of the law. But whatever anyone’s need, everyone has the same rights.
She seems to be against non-white and poor people having the same access as the well-connected. Does she think a poor white person can get a carry permit for NYC? They hate equality.
Yes, she is against non-white people or the poor being able to have guns. And she doesn’t like if the people who live outside of the effects of the Sullivan Law are able to get guns. In her weird view of the world that is “discrimination”. She believes everyone should be denied guns. To people like her that would be fair.
No- but the same people who wrote the constitution (1789) also passed the Immigration Act of 1790, which limited citizenship and constitutional rights to “ to “free White person(s) … of good character”.
Do you really think they were giving Indians guns? Did the slaves have guns? NO.
I can own guns because it’s my God-given right, not because it’s good for black peoples or whatever.
When the left starts to control the narrative on your issues, you have “entryism”.
So, not a far stretch to envision ” Obama guns and Obama ammo ” to go along with Obama phones, Obama laptops, Obama care, Obama fill in the blank….
I believe it was OBama phones for sure, not sure about laptops.
Could have been in the classroom for the children.
That’s the 5 acres and a mule cited
Biden is worse wanting to pay hundred of thousand of dollars for the sin of separation of children from their children.
Would need some DNA test on that.
How many of those kids were abandoned because they couldn’t keep up?
How many drown because they couldn’t swim?
How many kids were raped and abused along the way? How much is the Cartel being empowered? The Left doesn’t care because they have their eye on the prize.
The Biden payoff is both virtue signaling and another way to make Trump look bad. They don’t want to pay anyone separated under Obama. They’re pretending Obama didn’t build the cages. Suddenly, the kids in cages crowd is nowhere to be found, just like the believe all women crowd. It’s almost like they don’t believe a word of what they say.
Self Defense is not meaningless. Infact, it has more meaning now than ever.
Rittenhouse was NOT threatened because he had a gun. He was not a threat because he had a gun. He was in danger because of the threat that was there around him. It was that threat that justifies him having a gun. He could have just as easily had nothing more than a lead pipe. The threat against him would have been the same.
Too many people think that the presence of firearms makes things unsafe. That’s only true if those that have the guns also have no reverence for human life. You arm the criminals and you will have problems. You arm law abiding citizens and you will see those problems diminished.
Bingo
Exactly.
Prndll, well said. Those so feeble that the presence of a gun makes them uncomfortable should stay home.
Regardless, if they are so upset, afraid and concerned they should never attempt to disarm anyone. Something is amiss when a person is frightened of an object decides to approach and attack. The very definition if irrational action.
How did the left, traditionally the champions of the poor and minorities, end up arguing against the rights of the poor and minorities? Have you guys looked in a mirror lately? You’ve become the thing you used to despise.
The Left never really strayed from racism. They’ve continued to hold blacks down even since the Civil Rights Movement. They’ve convinced too many blacks that they can’t make it on their own without their Democrat saviors to protect them and provide for them. It makes life easier when all you have to do is scream racism instead of offering actual solutions.
The Puppet tells black people they aren’t black if they don’t vote for Democrats. He also said they don’t know how to get online, and poor people aren’t white. The Puppet is a lifelong racist.
Bro lay off the Hannity.
You can’t win by accepting the left’s moral premises.
I don’t follow any political moral premise. I was taught the difference between right and wrong when I was a kid. Racism being wrong isn’t a left wing moral premise. I’ve never been a political ideologue.
I’m making the observation that Democrats have fooled a large group of people with propaganda so they’ll vote for them. There’s a reason that a legal black immigrant is more likely to earn more and stay within a nuclear family than a black person growing up in America. It has nothing to do with skin color.
I’ve been saying it. Corporate billionaires bought the left. zuckerberg, soros, gates, etc. They turned the left to far right of the right. People like miner49er and dacian the dumb either are too mentally ill or too big of a sell out to realize they now champion fascism.
Why do you keep using the word fascism to describe the far left? Fascism is a far-right ideology.
It just makes you look stupid when you say that.
***
Oh I know- you watch too much Lugenpresse and the people who produce TV told you that word is to be used to describe anyone you don’t like.
So you’re saying that the National Socialist Workers Party weren’t socialist but ultra-conservative? Why didn’t they reinstall the Kaiser?
Way to prove his point there.
Socialism and fascism are two sides of the same authoritarian coin.
If you behave like like fascists do, then you are a fascist.
You fascist.
Feel free to play “The choking game” with yourself until you ‘win’… 🙂
Fascism takes a multitude of forms and is the enemy of freedom. Calling it a “far-right ideology” is being short sighted. It is a political ideology. Just like the term ‘racist’. ANYONE can be racist. Being black does NOT mean you can’t be racist. Racism is a problem of the heart and mind. It is not about skin color as much as dealing with people that are different. In the same way, fascism can come from anywhere on the political spectrum and must be put down anytime and anywhere it creeps up.
What do fascists do?
Nationalize monopolies? Burn porn books? Secure borders? Encourage natalism? Encourage masculinity? Suppress communism? Deport and imprison people like Soros, Bloomberg, Zuckerberg, Benioff? Liberalize gun laws? Sound money? Stop payments to foreign countries? Make women stay home?
How is that left wing? I feel like if you read about Fascism, you’d probably like it.
@You people have no concept of history
Interesting. Nationalize monopolies? like elections?
Burn porn books? like removing and banning books that contain the N word?
Secure borders? as if either side actually wants that.
Encourage nationalism? People no longer understand what that word even means anymore…it’s been so twisted.
Encourage masculinity? Like a gay Superman?
Suppress communism? Half the country and most politicians have lost any desire to actually do that.
Deport and imprison people like Soros, Bloomberg, Zuckerberg, Benioff? The last I heard, they are still free to use their money in the creation of tools to destroy.
Liberalize gun laws? would that be the old definition of ‘liberal’ or the new one that shuts down gun stores and bans guns? No one (of any color or race) can buy a gun that is not there.
Sound money? Not sure what you mean but Bitcoin does come to mind.
Stop payments to foreign countries? Last I checked, this is still happening and at a much higher pace. Obama and his pallets of cash come to mind.
Make women stay home? Like Rosie the riveter, female soldiers, or possibly a do-nothing vice president?
How is it NOT left wing? This is every wing. You want to keep politicians out of the bedroom? What do you think Roe v. Wade is? What that a right wing decision?
Fascism was a close competitor to state communism. They share many traits above. I think your Left-Right simplification of political ideologies is outdated and oversimplified.
Fascism may not be a perfect fit for the kind of authoritarianism that is rampant in the current Democratic Party, but it shares many features.
Just in relation to COVID, the Biden admin has partnered with Facebook to stop “misinformation.” It has also funneled taxpayer money to pharmaceutical companies. They have shut down international borders (except the politically inconvenient one). They have stated that Those actions may not be exactly fascism, but they sure do rhyme with it.
Trump was guilty of a few of those, too. I won’t give him a pass, but the Democrats have certainly taken the lead for authoritarian douchebaggery.
Fascism is the right side rail of Left turning socialist railroad tracks.
People have been fooled because the left Has been effective at putting out propaganda for decades. The Left has always been against gun rights for the individual.
Chairman Mao said “power flows out of the end of a gun barrel”. And he also said that as soon as he and his fellow Communists took power, they needed to make sure that the guns were confiscated from everyone else. So they could stay in power.
Well then, let the pearls be clutched.
Cope harder commies
The middle class can get carry permits in NYC?
“The middle class can get carry permits in NYC?”
Before their pay-for-play scheme got shut down in NYC, it cost $18,000 to ‘expedite’ a permit.
18 grand in NYC is an amount a middle-class person could save for a few years to get.
So, yes, a middle-class person could, and numerous did, to get a carry permit in NYC.
Had things worked out differently in the late 80s, I could have been a resident of Queens, NY. I probably would have gotten a permit that way, had that NYNX contract worked out…
To be specific, if you were in the business of buying and selling of diamonds, in New York City you could pay $18,000 and get a gun permit.
No other business in New York City had the connections with city government to get a gun permit.
Well, had, anyways… 😉
Begin Working in Home Now .A month earlier I GOT check of almost Twenty Five Thousand Us Dollars this online work is fundamental and direct, don’t need to go OFFICE, Its home online development SEE MORE……………..𝐖𝐰𝐰.jobapp3.𝐜𝐨𝐦
Note the author painted the New York rifle and pistol association as far right and all public defenders as progressive left.
Neither are true. This is more “white people are all fascists”and “everyone else is socialist” bullshit.
She’s a NYC city resident, it’s highly likely the public defenders she’s interacted with are Progressives…
With the Supremes considering abortion and 2A carry, the potential gnashing of progressive teeth could be EPIC!
Article 4 of the constitution of New York states new Yorkers have the right to bear arms.
So once again what’s written on a piece of paper doesn’t matter.
The NYS Constitution does not apply in NYC. Hasn’t for over a hundred years. When it comes to guns, NYC has express authority to write its own laws.
“Their vision, if realized, would make the self-defense claims of Mr. Rittenhouse and Mr. McMichael unremarkable, not only in red states, but across the country.”
It’s about time.
When the criminal element is unable to determine who is, or is not armed, that makes their job of preying on the weak far more difficult.
As far as I’m concerned, that’s an official Martha Stewart ‘Good Thing’… 🙂
“Tali Farhadian Weinstein”
Conjured name, conjured opinion.
Fakity-fake-fake.
my poor addled brain went straight yo juan epstein.
Tali Farhadian Weinstein – Ms. Farhadian Weinstein, a former federal and state prosecutor in New York, is a legal analyst on NBC News and MSNBC.
Probably the kind of prosecutor that thinks hugs will change hearts.
The kind of prosecutor that believes people with guns belong in prison.
Here’s the entire text of the NYT article :
“As you’ll count on, this Supreme Court docket case has generated the normal briefs from gun rights advocates: the N.R.A., gun golf equipment, libertarian students, Republican politicians. What’s unusual, and disheartening, is that the petitioners have additionally obtained help from a bunch of prestigious and seasoned New York public defenders, who argue that the New York regulation needs to be overturned — not likely on Second Modification grounds, however due to the way in which the regulation is enforced in opposition to their purchasers, Black and brown, poor defendants who want to hold weapons for self-defense. The general public defenders argue that, traditionally, permits have been issued inconsistently, and that also at this time, in lots of locations, it’s simpler for whites and members of the center class to get permits than it’s for individuals of colour and the poor. They usually argue their purchasers ought to have weapons similar to different People do. In different phrases, the progressive left has met far proper in describing harmful streets and the have to be armed on them.
Theirs just isn’t a authorized argument, however a political one, and is unlikely to sway a Supreme Court docket centered on the textual content and unique that means of the Structure (although the courtroom might discover it a helpful fig leaf if it decides in opposition to New York). It’s meant to shock, and it does, in its nihilism — a nihilism that echoes the far proper champions of the boys now we have seen on trial. As an alternative of taking weapons out of the arms of the Rittenhouses and McMichaels of the world, these progressive public defenders wish to degree “up”— to make weapons extra available to their purchasers, to all of us. Their imaginative and prescient, if realized, would make the self-defense claims of Mr. Rittenhouse and Mr. McMichael unremarkable, not solely in purple states, however throughout the nation.
The audacious place taken by these New York public defenders ought to give pause to anybody tempted to know, and perhaps even low cost, the Rittenhouse and McMichael defenses as basically conservative arguments enjoying to conservative juries in conservative states. If we begin to consider weapons solely as an issue within the arms of the Different (white supremacists, the far proper, criminals), we’ll miss the straightforward indisputable fact that unregulated weapons escalate violence throughout ideological traces. Their presence tends to create a necessity for self-defense on either side of the set off, about which the regulation has little or no to say. If Mr. Rosenbaum and Mr. Arbery did certainly attain for these weapons, weren’t they, little question, performing in self-defense? Extra weapons, irrespective of in whose arms, will create extra standoffs, extra intimidation, extra dying sanctioned within the eyes of the regulation.
Tali Farhadian Weinstein (@talifarhadian), a former federal and state prosecutor in New York, is a Authorized Analyst on NBC Information and MSNBC.”
EDIT – The author is running for Manhattan D.A. :
https://www.taliforda.com/
Summary:
Tali dislikes firearms and loathes anyone who is not a member of her “tribe”. And she really hates anyone who is not a member of her tribe and uses firearms against members of her tribe. Therefore, she vomits words about how awful firearms (and by implication non-members of her tribe) are in the desperate hope that people, fearful of being isolated, will abandon their principles and join her tribe.
Make sure you understand how Hellish life turns out for the people who are not members of her tribe if her tribe attains absolute power. For a glimpse of that, review the “Nanjing (China) massacre” or “comfort women” that Japanese soldiers raped 25 to 30 times a day, every day, for months on end–often until the women died of rape or sexually transmitted diseases from incessant rape.
“she really hates anyone who is not a member of her tribe”
the core of the entire matter. that’s all it’s about.
“Instead of taking guns out of the hands of the Rittenhouses and McMichaels of the world, these progressive public defenders want to level “up”— to make guns more readily available to their clients, to all of us. Their vision, if realized, would make the self-defense claims of Mr. Rittenhouse and Mr. McMichael unremarkable, not only in red states, but across the country.”
It would be a great thing if a claim of self-defense would become unremarkable in NYC and all across the country.
The Left has never believed in the idea of self-defense. They believe you should Retreat from any and all threats. Even if it means leaving your own home to get away from a home invader.
The Left demands a dependent population through restrictions on guns and self defense. Those actions and others, like confiscatory taxation, enhance the power of the state and of the leaders of the state at the expense of the people.
The Right demands a self-sufficient population through easing or eliminating restrictions on guns and self defense. Those actions and others, like less taxation, enhance the power of the people at the expense of the state and its leaders.
Jefferson said that the government we elect is the government we deserve. Well, he was wrong. We don’t deserve this leftist crap. Nobody does.
Latest on Rittenhouse
Looks like Rittenhouse will have his past haunting him for the rest of his life assuming also the Feds do not level charges against him. Students at Arizona University are demanding the immediate removal of Rittenhouse as they do not feel safe with him on campus.
We expect no less from you snowflakes.
The Cancel Culture in all its glory.
The students at Arizona State University, who are claiming that Rittenhouse is dangerous, are by-definition claiming that someone somehow deceived the jury (12 men and women) into finding Rittenhouse not-guilty.
Which is more likely? That someone deceived a jury of 12 men and women in a gravely serious and thorough legal proceeding? Or that a bunch of students are hysterical and categorically reject one of the most fundamental bedrock principles of our nation?
“they do not feel safe with him on campus”
says more about them than it does about rittenhouse. they should all wear bump helmets and rubber gloves when out-of-doors.
Wait, wasn’t he attending online only?
Congrats, Adolph.
Then the students at Arizona University should stay home if they are that feeble.
I guess you didn’t notice that these beotches are whining even though Kyle attends remotely from Illinois. I guess these idiots never noticed that Arizona is a concarry state. I guess these pansies never noticed that open carry is permissible in Arizona. I guess these idiots can’t see beyond the face of their cell phones and computers, or have any respect for the rule of law.
“in many places, it is easier for whites and members of the middle class to get permits than it is for people of color and the poor”
what is meant is that it’s easier for people with no criminal record to get permits.
I believe that the Sullivan law was designed to prevent the Irish from arming themselves. The basis of the historical events of NYC of olde.
Self defense is not meaningless unless someone is utterly ignorant of the law and recent events. The Arbery and Rittenhouse cases exemplify that the law WORKS, not that it doesn’t. If you chase someone down in the street trying to lynch them- you are not the victim and cannot claim self-defense.
Rittenhouse was entitled to defend himself from the crazied white mob that attacked him. Arbery was also entitled to defend himself from the three seemingly random white men who tried to kidnap him. It’s a shame that the latter died but there is no ‘gun control’ that would stop it unless you ban shotguns along with everything else.
She is a member of the protected class may issue carry chums up to. Didn’t say a thing about how the NYPD was basically a pay for play operation as a permit issuer. Arguably bad as any of the gangs she speaks of if not worse because they do it under the color of law.
It sounds to me like they are joining forces fighting for equal protection under the law while fighting institutional racism within a gun control scheme. It would be hilarious if the court rules that unrestricted open carry is protected by the 2nd amendment since it would bypass the need to force a governmental body to issue permits and instead the city and state government would be pressured to make concealed carry easily attainable to avoid forcing everyone to open carry. I wonder why the writer thinks that the equal protection clause of the constitution and fighting discriminatory laws is political.
Comments are closed.