New Mexico governor disarms the law abiding to solve rising violence

[O2HeN2]

New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham on Friday issued an emergency public health order that suspends the open and permitted concealed carry of firearms in Albuquerque for 30 days in the midst of a spate of gun violence.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/new-mex...-gun-violence/

[RblDiver]

New Mexico did away with qualified immunity in 2021. Any LE better be smart and not dare to enforce it, and their legislature should impeach her ASAP.

[eddiememphis]

I recall several guys on this site anticipating this- suspending rights due to a "public health crisis".

"The Democratic governor said she is expecting legal challenges, but felt compelled to act in response to gun deaths, including the fatal shooting of an 11-year-old boy outside a minor league baseball stadium this week."

The current playbook among Democrats seems to be act outside of the law and wait to see if there are legal repercussions.

[theGinsue]

"I welcome the debate and fight about how to make New Mexicans safer," she said at a news conference, flanked by leading law enforcement officials, including the district attorney for the Albuquerque area."

So, just how is disarming lawful citizens going to make anyone safer? Dumbass.

The governor also cited the August shooting death in Taos County of 13-year-old Amber Archuleta. A 14-year-old boy shot and killed the girl with his father's gun while they were at his home.

Yeah, she brings up this sad event, but just how would her emergency declaration/restriction have done anything to save this girl since it only applies to open/concealed carry OUTSIDE OF A HOME and only in Albuquerque.

Adding to what eddiememphis said, Liberal/Anti-Gun Playbook: Never let a tragedy go to waste. Look for every opportunity to violate citizens rights.

"Last month, 5-year-old Galilea Samaniego was fatally shot while asleep in a motor home. Four teens entered the mobile home community in two stolen vehicles just before 6 a.m. on Aug. 13 and opened fire on the trailer, according to police. The girl was struck in the head and later died at a hospital.

Well, it's a good thing she's making it illegal for a few days to possess a firearm - they would surely have prevented this unnecessary death caused by these otherwise law-abiding youth. I ask again, just how on earth do these liberal minds actually believe that their un-Constitutional restrictions will make anyone safer when the perpetrators in this case had already ignored the law by stealing cars, were likely violating the law by possessing the firearms they used in the first place (teen), and shot into what they had to have known/suspected was an occupied dwelling - all law violations. "Uh guys, I know we were planning on killing someone, but the governor says we can't carry these guns for now, so we just need to wait 30 days; mmmkay?!"

Again: The NM Gov is a dumbass.

[hollohas]

We all knew it was coming. Everybody just laid down with "20-days to slow the spread". The Gov knows Americans don't have any fight in them. We gave them a hall pass to do whatever they want because of our compliance during COVID.

[Great-Kazoo]

New Mexico did away with qualified immunity in 2021. Any LE better be smart and not dare to enforce it, and their legislature should impeach her ASAP.

When you consider the posted signs on business (covid era) storefronts said. Mask are mandatory under NM law. When i was "asked" by a salesperson to put on a mask , i said i would not be doing so. HE said well it's the law. Really when exactly did the state legislature pass mandatory mask wearing, into state law. HE got that deer in the headlights look.

So you're dealing with a state, in lg urban areas that pushed restrictive gun laws, just like CO. While they can't carry concealed, have the passed a 3 day waiting period, yet?

[theGinsue]

We just had a member start a thread in this forum about "Gun Confiscation Case Law". While it is definitely valuable information to be aware of, I need to stress that there is a difference between "gun confiscation" and "prohibition on carry/possession".

Gun confiscation, during times of emergency, has been prohibited under Public Law 109-295.

While SCOTUS has several rulings on prohibitions on carry and possession, it's restrictions are not as clear cut as 109-295. I absolutely expect legal challenges to this NM prohibition, which (in my humble opinion) will likely succeed on the plaintiff's behalf.

Unfortunately, states and municipalities continue to either ignore or misinterpret SCOTUS decisions from New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022), McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010), and District of Columbia v. Heller (2008).

The sad reality of these SCOTUS decisions is that they are intentionally vague in many ways, leaving them open to various interpretations. SCOTUS has been unwilling to write an unambiguous, clear cut, no holds barred line in the sand decision. Because of this, governments at all levels within the U.S. continue to pass un-Constitutional infringements on our Second Amendment rights. Unless and until SCOTUS steps up to do the right thing, these infringements will continue.


ETA:
Since plain language is not understandable by our elected officials, I thought I'd add these 2 items:

Amendment II of the United States Constitution
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Infringe (verb)
Verb Forms:
past simple: infringed
past participle: infringed
​[transitive] infringe something (of an action, a plan, etc.) to break a law or rule
​[transitive, intransitive] to limit somebody’s legal rights

[Great-Kazoo]

We just had a member start a thread in this forum about "Gun Confiscation Case Law". While it is definitely valuable information to be aware of, I need to stress that there is a difference between "gun confiscation" and "prohibition on carry/possession".

Gun confiscation, during times of emergency, has been prohibited under Public Law 109-295.

While SCOTUS has several rulings on prohibitions on carry and possession, it's restrictions are not as clear cut as 109-295. I absolutely expect legal challenges to this NM prohibition, which (in my humble opinion) will likely succeed on the plaintiff's behalf.

Unfortunately, states and municipalities continue to either ignore or misinterpret SCOTUS decisions from New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022), McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010), and District of Columbia v. Heller (2008).

The sad reality of these SCOTUS decisions is that they are intentionally vague in many ways, leaving them open to various interpretations. SCOTUS has been unwilling to write an unambiguous, clear cut, no holds barred line in the sand decision. Because of this, governments at all levels within the U.S. continue to pass un-Constitutional infringements on our Second Amendment rights. Unless and until SCOTUS steps up to do the right thing, these infringements will continue.


ETA:
Since plain language is not understandable by our elected officials, I thought I'd add these 2 items:

Amendment II of the United States Constitution
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Infringe (verb)
Verb Forms:
past simple: infringed
past participle: infringed
​[transitive] infringe something (of an action, a plan, etc.) to break a law or rule
​[transitive, intransitive] to limit somebody’s legal rights

What ever terminology used. The sheriffs of both counties said they will not be enforcing her decree.

[eddiememphis]

https://apnews.com/article/albuquerq...036ccf187a7f1c

Lawsuits are being filed.

Even this little fool thinks it is a step too far.

[Bailey Guns]

^^ Aw, son-of-a-bitch. Don't put me in the possession of having to agree with, or even having to defend, him even just once.