New Mexico governor issues order suspending the right to carry firearms in public across Albuquerque

[LeverGunFan]

Originally Posted by Tom Servo

Under different circumstances, I'd agree. However, just about every official and agency charged with enforcing this has said they won't. It's rare to see that kind of unity, that quickly, on something like this.

The NM State Police work for the governor, and I don't recall reading in any of the reports if the SP commissioner has said if they will enforce the order or not. So any protestors could be in jeopardy if the state police elect to enforce the governor's order.

[ballardw]

Originally Posted by 44 AMP

Note the report does not say "carry" it says "possession." AND, its not limited to one city, but covers everywhere there have been more than 1,000 violent crimes (note it does not say "shootings", it says "violent crimes") per 100,000 residents SINCE 2021.

Note that a town with a population of 100 that has 1 "violent crime" meets this threshold.

When I lived in New Mexico I did some of the state traffic accident statistics. One of the lowest population counties would not-infrequently have the highest or nearly so traffic accident death rate per capita (I don't remember if this was reported per 1,000 or 10,000 persons) because 1) the county have very low population 2) was so rural that a traffic accident on the one "major" road could go undiscovered for many hours 3) response time one-way by helicopter to the nearest trauma hospital was nearly an hour. So even if discovered while alive and were able to get a message out (this was in the 80's so no cell phones) responses were often too late. But the same county would also often have the lowest rate because it would go years without any traffic crash fatalities because the number to crashes was low.

[zoomie]

I believe that's a case of "Lies, damned lies, and statistics."

[44 AMP]

And all these conditions could be extended indefinitely as there were (and still are) very few limits on the capacity of any state governor to declare an emergency health condition until they see fit to ease their directives. The average citizen does not have the resources to fight state government-declared directives when the consequences are so dire.

Another thing to consider, and I mean seriously consider is who and what we elect to the state legislatures. AND, where their loyalties actually lie. IT should be the people (and the law) but often it is "the party" and that is bad for all of us.

In my state, the governor was granted emergency powers, under existing law, for 30 days. After which, the legislature was supposed to reconvene and either authorize another 30 days, or end the emergency powers authority.

They never did. Unser Fuehrer...pardon me, our governor KEPT his emergency powers for over 600 days. Nearly two years, and NEITHER the legislature (the majority of which is the same party as the governor) nor the courts (which were virtually shut down for everything other than day to day law enforcement cases) did ANYTHING to enforce existing law.

And, even worse, no one will do anything to punish the Gov for violating the law, as he is "retiring" from politics at the end of his current term. Any court case brought now will almost certainly take years to reach a verdict, and even if he is found guilty (sadly not a certainty) no one is going to be interested in dragging that particular worm out of his comfy retirement hole for something that happened in the past and "no longer matters" today.

And, while I applaud LEO personel and groups for solidly opposing the new measure and stating that they will not enforce it, there is a drawback to that.

The drawback is that, if the law is not enforced, then "no one is harmed" and there are no "test cases" to bring before the courts to get them to rule on the law (or executive order). So legal challenges can only be brought on violations of legal procedures in creating the law, and those lack any urgency since "no one is being harmed".

Understand that I would not volunteer to be a test case, don't think any ordinary folks would, but without someone suffering harm under the law, getting it ruled invalid has a very low priority in our system. Basically if someone is being harmed, the push is to "fix it now" before others suffer the same harm, or worse. But if no one is, then it gets treated as an "administrative matter" which they will address when they get around to it.

Good for would be tyrants, bad for us....

[44 AMP]

Found this in today's "news", kinda says a lot about the NM Gov's attitude, I think...

Lujan Grisham told The New York Times that she was within her authority. “I have emergency powers. Gun violence is an epidemic. Therefore, it’s an emergency,” she said. When she issued the order, she said, "No constitutional right, in my view, including my oath, is intended to be absolute," according to Fox News. When asked if she expected criminals to follow her edict, she replied, "Uh, no."

[Aguila Blanca]

"Gun violence is an epidemic."

There you have it. The anti-gun forces have been pushing this malarkey for at least 20 years or so, with the AMA leading the charge. Pediatricians are at the front, so those of you who have young children need to be especially careful. You need to teach your children that it's NOBODY's business if you have guns in the house. Watch out for spaces on patient intake forms where they ask about guns in the house. As far as I know, that's not a medical-related question so it doesn't need to be answered. However, if you leave it blank they'll undoubtedly ask why, so IMHO it's better to just lie and enter "No." I don't think that's illegal, since you're not under oath or penalty of perjury when you fill out a patient intake form at a doctor's office.

Also, never allow a doctor to examine your child without a parent present in the exam room. Discuss with your kids ahead of time how they should respond if a doctor asks them about guns in the house. And, on a different topic, also be on the alert for pediatricians steering kids in the direction of gender dysphoria.

It's very sad but the truth is that in the United States today, you actually can't trust your family pediatrician (unless it's someone you know very well).

[44 AMP]

I no longer have children in the house, my youngest turned 40 this year, so that's not a problem.

I do answer when there is a blank that asks if I own a gun or if there is a gun in the house.

I answer honestly, and the answer I give is "no". I do not own A gun, and there is not A gun in the house.

If you were taught proper English, the article "a" is singular.

What worries me more, at the moment, is a State Governor (or any elected official at any, and every level or authority) who believes that their oath of office is not absolute, and is dumb enough to publicly say so.

If an oath can be modified or altered, any part ignored at the oath taker's whim (emergency or NOT) then the oath is non-binding and invalid.

Consider the implications of that. IF the SWORN oath of office is not binding, how can any sworn oath be, including sworn testimony in court. And, by extension all oaths or promises in general???

Doesn't that mean that no govt official, no police officer, no doctor, no ONE can be trusted because they swore and oath??

since that is apparently what the NM Governor believes, why aren't the police included in her "no carry" order???

Doesn't seem to be "equal treatment under the law" to me.....


Remember the Lautenberg Amendment (law) that turned misdemeanor domestic violence convictions into lifetime bar to firearms possession?? It did NOT exempt the police, or the military. It applied to them as individuals, on duty AND off.

Lots (some estimates run as high as thousands) of police officers (and military) were legally barred from having a gun, even in the official course of their duties.

WHY isn't the NM Gov following that precendent? Aren't these things that should be publically asked and responded to?? OR should that governor just be recalled and sent packing for politically terminal stupidity??

[mehavey]

WHY isn't the NM Gov following that precedent?

Because this is theater, 44A, pure theater.
While simultaneously testing a back door to elimination/confiscation under the name of "health emergency"

So obvious a cave man can see it.

.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by 44 AMP

I do answer when there is a blank that asks if I own a gun or if there is a gun in the house.

I answer honestly, and the answer I give is "no". I do not own A gun, and there is not A gun in the house.

If you were taught proper English, the article "a" is singular.

And if the question is "Are there any guns in the house?"?

Well, the answer is still no. I don't have any cannons or naval guns, all I have is a few rifles and pistols. The difference was drilled into me during Army Basic Training: "This is my rifle, this is my gun. This is for fighting, this is for fun."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannon

[Metal god]

So obvious a cave man can see it.

Haha that actually made me lol

[Wag]

https://www.koat.com/article/bernali...order/45082887

The county sheriff made some great comments today. To the point, blunt and candid, well stated. Crystal clear.

--Wag--

[Aguila Blanca]

That's an unusually erudite sheriff.

[LeverGunFan]

Judge grants temporary restraining order, effective until October 3 court hearing. AP story here.

[armoredman]

This is shaping up very interestingly.

[natman]

Some comments from the New Mexico Attorney General, Raul Torrez, a Democrat:

“Though I recognize my statutory obligation as New Mexico’s chief legal officer to defend state officials when they are sued in their official capacity, my duty to uphold and defend constitutional rights of every citizen takes precedence,” Torrez said. “Simply put, I do not believe that the Emergency Order will have any meaningful impact on public safety but, more importantly, I do not believe it passes constitutional muster.”

"I encourage you to engage in a more thoughtful and deliberative process with members of the New Mexico legislature rather than taking unilateral action that infringes on the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens while having little if any discernible impact on the underlying dynamics driving gun violence...."

"rebranding gun violence as a "public health emergency" will not satisfy the heightened judicial standard for a blanket prohibition..."

"the novel reclassification of gun violence as a "public health emergency" appears to have been adapted as a pretext...unlikely to survive judicial scrutiny."

[Paul B.]

This is a news article on CNN as discussed by Colion Noir. Be advised he does cuss a few times. New Mexico's governor is a stubborn old gal and even with all the opposition, she refuses to back down. Visual proof one cannot fix stupid.

https://youtu.be/mocbFJeqBeI

Paul B.

[FITASC]

Since she can personally be sued for violating the NM and US Constitution, and she has ZERO support from all NM DAs and LEOS, why is this still an item? Why hasn't she been arrested and imprisoned for violating the Constitution of both the US and NM and violating her oath of office? Until these folks are imprisoned and all of their earthly assets are confiscated, they will continue to push the envelope of infringement; when it hurts personally, then it will stop.

[44 AMP]

At the risk of preaching to the choir or stating the obvious, have you noticed that there seems to be one question or kind of question that is never asked by interviewers, hosts, moderators, mediators or reporters in general when anti gun people point out children (or anyone else) shot and killed by "gun" violence?

Its a simple question, and I for one would like to see it asked and see what the anti's answer is.

When they point out how "there was an 11yr old shot and killed..." (or which ever example they use, and that is simply, "Where is the person who pulled the trigger???"

WHY aren't they in custody, yet?? Why are they wasting time, resources, and money having meetings, creating "programs" and issuing "public health orders" restricting the people who have not broken any laws, AND have an enumerated Constitutional right to arms?

The NM gov is on the record stating she doesn't believe criminals will obey her "dictat" ruling. SO, WHY is she doing it??

Is there even a hint of evidence that law abiding citizens are the ones committing "gun violence"?? IF so, WHERE IS IT??

SHOW IT TO US! IF it exists, why aren't they showing us? IF it exists (and I don't believe it does) but if it did exist, then, we might have a rational discussion about how to address the issue and not just some childish dream the bad people in the world will stop doing what they do because of a rule, law or other paper that they won't obey but you think will make all things right.

Pass a law, or an emergency public health decree that the maneater may not possess its teeth in certain places for a certain amount of time. Feel safe and sleep soundly at night, because you KNOW that the maneater will of course obey your rule.

They won't.

And, they have no interest in doing so.

They will continue to do what they have always done, ignoring your rules in the process, until something physically stops them. That is the way the world works, and no amount of wishful thinking changes that. ONLY physical action changes the physical world.

[Metal god]

I can’t find it now but believe Andrew Branca from Law of self defense has posted or at least talked about how many ccw holders use firearms illegally every year in his videos . I was surprised haw many it actually was , that said it was not many in relation to guns used in homicides in general . I really don’t remember but want to say 20 or 30 a year nationwide. In the grand scheme of things its a minuscule percentage but it was still more then I thought it would have been .

44 , I found this with a quick search

https://www.heritage.org/firearms/co...-carry-killers

[44 AMP]

ah, the wonderful VPC...the people who used to be known as Handgun Control Inc. The people who had for many years a fellow named Sugarman as one of their main players. The same fellow who left NBC news under a cloud due to the finding that "dangerous" pickup trucks had been rigged to explode on his watch...

The people who were publicly outed decades ago for using false and misleading data in their figures reporting "death of a child due to a handgun".

Wonderful folks who counted everyone under 25 as a child, counted suicides, homicides, accidents and people shot by police, with any firearm as "death of a child due to a handgun".

They were liars 40 years ago and the current generation are liars still.

[natman]

Originally Posted by 44 AMP

ah, the wonderful VPC...the people who used to be known as Handgun Control Inc. The people who had for many years a fellow named Sugarman as one of their main players. The same fellow who left NBC news under a cloud due to the finding that "dangerous" pickup trucks had been rigged to explode on his watch...

While I fully agree that Sugarmann is a liar, I can't find any evidence that he was involved in the NBC exploding truck scandal.

A bit of history: Anti gun rights campaigns first focused on handguns. By the late 80's that campaign had run out of steam, so Josh Sugarmann came up with a new approach to pep up his anti gun organization. From his paper, Assault Weapons and Accessories in America:

It will be a new topic in what has become to the press and public an “old” debate. Although handguns claim more than 20,000 lives a year, the issue of handgun restriction consistently remains a non-issue with the vast majority of legislators, the press, and public. .....Assault weapons—just like armor-piercing bullets, machine guns, and plastic firearms—are a new topic. The weapons’ menacing looks, coupled with the public’s confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons—anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun—can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons. [underlining added]

The upshot: It's easy to market bans on "Assault weapons" because they are scary looking, especially to people who don't know anything about guns. Based on the hysteria it's created, the strategy has worked quite well.

[44 AMP]

While I fully agree that Sugarmann is a liar, I can't find any evidence that he was involved in the NBC exploding truck scandal.

I doubt you will find any "evidence".. Its not going to be out there for a Google search to show. These kinds of things tend to "disappear" (if they were even found in the first place) when the people who might be responsible seek other jobs and their former company wants everything about the matter to go away...

It was a long time ago, no one was physically injured, formal, criminal (or as far as I know no civil charges either) charges were not filed, so there aren't going to be much in the way of records open to the public on the matter.

And, I don't care if he didn't personally wire the trucks to blow up on camera, or not. IIRC, he held a position of authority in the news dept at the time, and even IF he knew nothing and was not involved, it happened on his watch and he allowed it to happen. Maybe he was not involved, but he left that job under a cloud of suspicion, and for those of us who remember it, and add that to his behavior since, I would not take his word for anything.

But, that's just me....

[Metal god]

That reminds me of the reporter that claimed to show having a concealed firearm in a classroom would do nothing if gunmen charged into the class . She even had a big demonstration set up with simulated armed student/s in the class and gunmen charging in .

In every simulated attack the bad guys took out the armed student before they could even draw there gun . Hmm….. that made some people wonder if the good guy never even exposed there firearm how could the bad guys take them out so fast ??? Turns out the bad guys were told ahead of time the description of the student with the ccw and where each of them were sitting before they charged in . When you watch the video the gunmen literally go straight to the students with guns and take them out first . Total bogus hit piece that was thankfully called out before it could get any real traction.

Not sure what ever happened to that reporter

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by Metal god

Not sure what ever happened to that reporter

Probably got a bonus and a promotion ...

[LeverGunFan]

In the wake of the temporary restraining order, the NM governor has amended her executive order to only apply to public parks and playgrounds. Link to AP article here.