Voters approved [a] ballot measure[] to ban handguns in San Francisco . . . [on] Tuesday.
With 100 percent of San Francisco precincts reporting, 58 percent of voters backed the proposed gun ban while 42 percent opposed it.
Measure H prohibits the manufacture and sale of all firearms and ammunition in the city, and makes it illegal for residents to keep handguns in their homes or businesses.
Only two other major U.S. cities — Washington and Chicago — have implemented such sweeping handgun bans.
[A]lthough law enforcement, security guards and others who require weapons for work are exempt from the measure, current handgun owners would have to surrender their firearms by April.
This has to violate the 2nd Amendment. Private citizens being forced to surrender their firearms, presumably to the Government???
I consider myself to be a liberal. I also consider the NRA to be an insanely right-wing nutjob group of fanatics, not to be taken seriously. I support rational limits on gun sales and ownership, such as restrictions on assault weapons, background checks, waiting periods, etc.
However, I am also very respectful of our constitution, and I like guns. (Guns are extremely precise machines that I find to be endlessly interesting to look at, disassemble, calibrate, and shoot.)
I am not a hunter and I am not interested in killing living things -- including other humans. But I like to shoot at paper targets, which is pretty harmless. It's like playing darts, except that it involves complicated machines that make very loud noises. Mmm, noises . . . .
My dad is 82 years old. He owns a half dozen or so handguns, including: 1) the Colt 45 my grandfather carried in Europe during his service in World War One; 2) a Civil War era revolver; and 3) a couple of 22 caliber semi-automatic pistols designed for target shooting, including a rare version of the Colt Woodsman.
When my dad dies (which won't be too long, given that he's 82), I will inherit these weapons. All of them are antiques. None of them is particularly deadly. None of them would be desireable to someone wishing to commit a crime or kill a lot of people today. Yet I can't own them in San Francisco. And I'll have to surrender them?? What am I going to do?
The Second Amendment states, in part: "[T]he right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
I dislike the NRA, and I want nothing to do with it. However, I'm going to have to stand with it on this one.
In my opinion, the measure approved today banning the ownership of handguns in San Francisco is unconstitutional, as it violates the Second Amendment. It clearly infringes upon my right to "bear arms." I predict that the courts will eventually so hold.
Do you agree?
UPDATE: The NRA has already filed a lawsuit challenging the ban. As one of the commentors pointed out, the 2nd Amendment only applies to acts of congress, not local regulations. The NRA challenges the law primarily on the ground that it is preempted by or contradicts state law.