Wyoming court keeps guns out of the hands of illegals

On May 7, the US Court of Appeals in the District of Wyoming affirmed a lower court’s decision that illegal immigrants do not have a right to own firearms under the US Constitution.  Attorneys for the Defendant- Appellant, Emmanuel Huitron-Guizar say they will appeal to the US Supreme Court.

A ruling being hailed by many as a “no brainer” since persons who are here illegally do not and should not possess Second Amendment rights; yet barely a mention from the anti-gun lobby even though the law keeps guns out of the hands of would be dangerous criminals.

Huitron-Guizar, a 24 year old illegal resident, brought to Wyoming at the age of 3 from Mexico, was caught in March 2011 for being an illegal alien in possession of firearms and sentenced to a term of 18 months in jail with deportation upon release (The court would later reduce this term to 6 months).

Similar to the way all ‘persons,’ whether non citizens or illegal residents, have a Fifth Amendment right to an indictment of a grand jury before being held for a capital crime, Huitron-Guizar sought to possess the right to own and carry firearms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment, yet the court found that ‘the people’ phrased in the Second Amendment has a narrower confine than the term ‘persons’ in the Fifth Amendment.

The court also found that it is incumbent upon Congress to furnish laws that keep “instruments of deadly force from those deemed irresponsible or dangerous” and ultimately “crime control and public safety are indisputably important interests.”

So, where is the Brady campaign applauding this ruling dealing with public safety and guns? So silent we can hear the town clock ticking. Of course, the gun control lobby has no interest in public safety vs. the gun-toting criminals; their only interest is removing the Second Amendment as a valid privilege, and is prepared to trample any other privilege to get there.

Quick to exploit the victims of violent crimes at every turn, on the 5th anniversary of the Virginia Tech tragedy that occurred on April 16, the Brady campaign trotted out all the sad victims and their sad stories, recalling Virginia Tech, Columbine and other tragic incidences at a press conference, but were not and never are quick to point out that crime control is doable without violating the Second Amendment.

Brady campaign president Dan Gross encourages the public to sign a statement ‘Against Arming Dangerous People’ for submittal to congress. The statement defines dangerous people as: Convicted felons, convicted domestic abusers, terrorists, and people found to be dangerously mentally ill. 

Yet, there are plentiful laws to support gun restrictions from the four identified groups. Gross states the obvious restrictions that most Americans agree upon in an attempt to create an illusion that these restrictions do not exist. Rather, he is trying to convince us of the oxymoron that gun control laws that harass innocent Americans actually protect innocent Americans, when we know they do not.

Gross is playing the outrageous blame game when he says the National Rifle Association gleefully put the gun in George Zimmerman’s hands. Calling for legislation that would deem Zimmerman (and anyone else they can find who owns a gun) ‘dangerous’ enough to be excluded from Second Amendment rights, and asking Congress to disregard the Fifth Amendment is not the underbelly of an honest campaign, but the typical type of undermining of the constitution that the anti-gun lobby engages in. 

Now, it would be unconstitutional for congress to pass legislation that would deny Zimmerman, an accused killer no doubt, but a legal citizen with certain rights, nonetheless, Fifth Amendment rights.  We know by now organizations such as the Brady campaign cannot be trusted since they routinely hide behind victims of gun related crimes to push forward anti-firearm legislation whether it violates the constitution or not. 

If the gun control lobby truly cared about dangerous would be criminals, like illegal immigrants, they would be jumping up and down with excitement over the Appellate court decision, but guess what?  Tick…tock…tick…tock.