A federal judge in California has struck down a law that requires a 10-day waiting period for gun purchases, but only for current gun owners who have already passed a background check and those who have a permit or certificate of eligibility to own a gun.
Eastern District of California Judge Anthony W. Ishii said Monday that the waiting period provision violates the Second Amendment rights of those who have already been approved to own a gun. This includes those who have previously undergone a background check and own a gun, people with concealed-carry permits and people who have a state certificate of eligibility to own a gun.
First-time gun buyers would still be subject to the waiting period, which Ishii emphasized in his ruling.
“Given the nature of the challenges made, the Court emphasizes that it is expressing no opinion on the constitutionality of the 10-day waiting period in general or as applied to first time California firearms purchasers,” he said.
Read the full article at FoxNews.com.
The altercation began at about 1 a.m. when Ralph Weems and the friend, David Knighten, chose to go inside the Waffle House. Knighten said they made this decision after a man in the parking lot diplomatically suggested that they should leave because the patrons inside were angry about the Aug. 9 police shooting death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo. Thus, the unidentified man explained, the restaurant would not be a safe place for two white people.
According to Knighten, Weems, 32, began arguing with customers not long after he entered the Waffle House. It’s not clear what was said or what was in dispute. After the police eventually showed up, Weems and Knighten left.
On the way home, the pair decided to stop at a Huddle House — a similar, less iconic eatery that dots the South. The Huddle House was in West Point. Miss.
A group of people followed Weems and Knighten to the mostly empty Huddle House parking lot. A security guard told everyone to leave. However, Weems and Knighten found that some of the men had blocked their way.
Knighten told reporters he was trying to diffuse the situation. When a security guard told everyone to leave, Knighten said he was blocked from getting to Weems, who was on the ground being kicked by a group of people. Knighten said others then attacked him.“I do remember racial slurs being yelled from the crowd,” he told the Associated Press.
Police Chief Tim Brinkley , who could not be reached for comment Monday, said in the release that the attack right now is an aggravated assault investigation, and that the cause is not yet determined.
“This does not appear to be a hate crime,” he said.
Though racial discrimination exists, it is nowhere near the barrier it once was. The relevant question is: How much of what we see today can be explained by racial discrimination?
This is an important question because if we conclude that racial discrimination is the major cause of black problems when it isn’t, then effective solutions will be elusive forever. To begin to get a handle on the answer, let’s pull up a few historical facts about black Americans.
In 1950, female-headed households were 18 percent of the black population. Today it’s close to 70 percent. One study of 19th-century slave families found that in up to three-fourths of the families, all the children lived with the biological mother and father. In 1925 New York City, 85 percent of black households were two-parent households. Herbert Gutman, author of “The Black Family in Slavery and Freedom, 1750-1925,” reports, “Five in six children under the age of six lived with both parents.” Also, both during slavery and as late as 1920, a teenage girl raising a child without a man present was rare among blacks.
Coupled with the dramatic breakdown in the black family structure has been an astonishing growth in the rate of illegitimacy. The black illegitimacy rate in 1940 was about 14 percent; black illegitimacy today is over 70 percent, and in some cities, it is over 80 percent.
The point of bringing up these historical facts is to ask this question, with a bit of sarcasm: Is the reason the black family was far healthier in the late 1800s and 1900s that back then there was far less racial discrimination and there were greater opportunities? Or did what experts call the “legacy of slavery” wait several generations to victimize today’s blacks?
Read the full OpEd at CNSNews.com.
Surveillance video of the fatal police shooting of John Crawford in an Ohio Wal-Mart earlier this month shows the 22-year-old talking on the phone and leaning on an air rifle sold in the store before he was shot, the attorney for Crawford’s family says.
Crawford, a father of two, was shot by two police officers Aug. 5 after several shoppers called 911 to report that a man was carrying a gun around the store.
The gun turned out to be a Crosman MK-177 pellet gun, which Wal-Mart sells for approximately $100.
Crawford family attorney Michael Wright said that Crawford was on a cell phone before the shooting and was likely not aware that police were approaching. He also said that the video showed Crawford leaning on the butt of the air rifle while on the phone. In the next frame, he is shown on the ground after having been shot.
“From what we’ve seen, John had no opportunity to put the gun down,” Wright said, adding that Crawford was “doing nothing more, nothing less than shopping,”
Wright, who has seen store surveillance video of the shooting incident, said Crawford was shot while talking on the phone, holding the butt of the gun with the barrel pointed at the floor.
He also told TheDC that the family “was not shown all of the video.”
Wright said at Tuesday’s press conference that he believes authorities have only released information that benefits them.
“Everything released is one-sided. There is nothing favorable to John Crawford. You can’t show different pieces, show it all, don’t trickle pieces to gain favor of the public, “said Wright.