The Nebraska Firearms Owners Association sued both Omaha and Lincoln, arguing new gun ordinances are illegal.
This from msn.com.
The ordinances ban guns on city property—parks, libraries, etc.
The cities put those rules in place as a response to LB77, which allows people to legally carry concealed weapons without a permit.
In the lawsuit filed this week, the nonprofit argues there will be ‘irreparable harm’ if they lose their ability to bear arms for self-defense on city properties, adding that protecting the right to bear arms is in the public interest.
Last week, Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers issued a legal opinion, having said:
[It is] unlawful for cities to impose
gun restrictions on city-owned property.
Omaha City Attorney Matt Kuhse said the legislature specifically gave cities the authority to regulate gun possession on city property and should have provided more specific language.
Lincoln City Attorney Yohance Christie said the city disagrees with the court filing.
Christie explained:
The actions the City has taken to protect the safety and quality of life of our residents and visitors are in compliance with the law.
In a statement, State Sen. Tom Brewer, who introduced LB77, called local executive orders and ordinances preventing people from carrying guns for self-defense “illegal.”
Brewer stated:
I am optimistic that Nebraska courts will do the right thing and stop these illegal local gun control schemes.
The Legislature did its part. Now it is time for a different branch of government to do its part.
Final thoughts: To those with ulterior motives, ‘shall not be infringed’ is seen as a steeplechase hurdle—a challenge not a Constitutional amendment.
