Reason - Most courts that have considered the constitutionality of such bans have struck them down (and others have been recently repealed). But Judge Edgardo Ramos's opinion yesterday in Calce v. City of N.Y. (S.D.N.Y.) upheld the New York state ban and New York City ban, concluding that the plaintiffs had the burden of introducing specific evidence of how common such weapons are:
"[T]he Second Amendment does not protect those weapons not typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes." Therefore, Plaintiffs must show that stun guns and tasers are in "common use" today, and that they are "typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes."
Here, Plaintiffs have not provided any studies, reports, or data for the Court to conduct a "statistical inquiry" into whether stun guns and tasers are in common use. Plaintiffs do not "even identify the most basic of statistics including, for example, the number of stun guns and/or tasers purchased in the United States for any given year." Thus, Plaintiffs provide "no evidence whatsoever to support their claim that stun guns and tasers are in common use in the United States for self-defense, let alone in New York City."
No comments:
Post a Comment