Owen Courrèges
New Orleans District Attorney Leon Cannizzaro has really thrown down the gauntlet vis-à-vis his support for gun control. Next year, he plans to lobby the Louisiana legislature to pass an unconstitutional anti-gun law. Not only that, he actually expects the NRA to aid him in his endeavors.
This tale of professional overreach and disregard for the Louisiana Constitution began earlier this month. On December 3rd, Cannizzaro released a statement in which he clumsily attempted to call out the National Rifle Association (NRA) for their opposition to new gun control laws.
“I intend to be back in Baton Rouge in the upcoming year to advocate for [new gun control] legislation again,” Cannizzaro said. “Before I do so, I am inviting the NRA to propose what they believe are reasonable gun control measures that will reduce this wanton violence to which Americans have grown far too familiar.”
Of course, Cannizzaro is well-aware that the NRA doesn’t support any new gun control measures, and even if it did, it probably doesn’t agree with Cannizzaro regarding what measures are “reasonable.”
It didn’t help that Cannizzaro’s initial statement failed to clarify exactly what kinds of measures he believes he can spitball with the NRA. However, he did offer some clarification a few days later while appearing on Garaland Robinette’s program on WWL radio, “The Think Tank.”
Cannizzarro began with the usual pleasantries, remarking that he merely wants to strengthen “the laws that we already have to punish the criminals,” and pointedly adding that “we certainly do not want to offend more of the rights of the law abiding citizens.” He even vowed fealty to the Second Amendment, albeit with somewhat conditional language.
Next, Cannizzaro proposed simply strengthening penalties for illegal carrying. “[I]t is illegal for someone to carry a weapon concealed on his person without that permit, and, again, and I am simply saying, ‘look maybe we should be able to some of those penalties.’“
“[W]hy not have mandatory penalties[?]” Cannizzaro asked rhetorically.
This proposal of Cannizzaro’s may gain some traction, but it is still problematic because he is talking about a victimless crime. A person who carries a concealed handgun without a permit is not necessarily a street tough looking for his next mark. Unless police have more on a suspect than their lack of a concealed handgun license, felony charges with mandatory minimums would strike me as excessive. They would also take much-needed discretion away from judges.
Still, that’s the subject of a legitimate policy debate. Next, however, Cannizzaro went completely off the rails by proposing that Louisiana enact a law prohibiting the open carry of firearms.
“I know Louisiana is also an open carry state,” Cannizzaro admitted. “In other words, if someone wants to walk down the street, the middle of a Canal Street, Bourbon Street, any street you want in the City of New Orleans, and your gun is open to public view, you carry it in your hand, it seems to me there should be some consequence for that, but there doesn’t seem to be a law in Louisiana that would prevent someone from doing that.”
Cannizzaro went on to say that the open carry issue “is the ludicrous part of this entire discussion,” as though it is simply apparent to everyone that open carry should be illegal.
The statements by our esteemed district attorney regarding open carry were very troubling insofar as they reveal that he has little understanding of this area of the law – a disturbing position for a public official speaking from a position of expertise and authority on a radio show.
Contrary to what Cannizzaro believes, open carry is not merely legal by virtue of the lack of any laws that are clearly against it – open carry is protected by the Louisiana Constitution as recognized by the Supreme Court. What Cannizzaro reckless refers to as “ludicrous” is, in fact, a citizen’s right.
In the case of State v. Nelson, 367 So. 2d 317, 318 (La. 1979), the Louisiana Supreme Court held unambiguously that “[t]he carrying of an unconcealed weapon is not a special privilege or advantage enjoyed by a police officer.” Rather, “[e]ach citizen is guaranteed the right to keep and bear arms not concealed on his person.”
That’s not all. Nelson was a decision handed down long before Louisiana passed a new constitutional amendment strengthening our constitutional right to keep and bear arms, which passed with an overwhelming 74% of the vote statewide in 2012 – over vocal opposition from Cannizzaro. That relatively new amendment subjects all firearms laws to “strict scrutiny,” the highest level of review reserved for fundamental freedoms.
In other words, Cannizzaro’s proposal to ban open carry is plainly unconstitutional. Unless he believes the citizens of this state are prepared to overturn an amendment they passed just three years ago to just to authorize a novel restriction on the open carry of firearms, it’s a non-starter.
Also unclear is exactly what problem Cannizzaro believes exists relative to open carry. His hyperbole about a person carrying a gun in their hand is just that – hyperbole – because brandishing about a gun for no legitimate purpose would at least constitute the offense of disturbing the peace. Most citizens who open carry simply have holstered handguns, properly carried and in plain sight.
Cannizzaro’s only stated concern is that police officers, ignorant of the law, will detain and arrest open carriers, though district attorneys won’t be able to charge them with anything. To wit, Cannizzaro explained to Robinette that “when it comes putting it on the district attorney’s table and say what charge are we going to use to enforce what the officer may believe is a violation, there is really none.”
Cannizzaro called that a “problem,” and I agree. It’s a problem. It’s a problem that police are so ignorant of the law that they’re stopping and arresting people for exercising a right guaranteed to them under the Louisiana Constitution. That needs to stop.
It makes perfect sense that open carry is legal in this city. The criminal element in New Orleans isn’t carrying firearms openly; criminals conceal their weapons to commit their crimes, and they don’t ask for permission from the government to do so. The only people who would be impacted by laws against open carry would be the law-abiding, the same law-abiding citizens that Cannizzaro claims he won’t interfere with.
It is painfully obvious that little common ground exists between Cannizzaro and the NRA, but that’s not because the NRA is obstinate or radical – it’s because Cannizzaro is completely off-base. Ultimately, his grandstanding is self-defeating and merits no formal response.
Owen Courrèges, a New Orleans attorney and resident of the Garden District, offers his opinions for UptownMessenger.com on Mondays. He has previously written for the Reason Public Policy Foundation.
It’s hard to asses my disappointment with this article and the reasons offered in its defense given the unmitigated slaughter of New Orleans youth, random acts of violence, and armed theft that plague this city. Something dramatic needs to be done. Give Cannizzaro a chance to do something. Quoting book page and paragraph of a process that doesn’t work for us New Orleanians, all New Orleanians, is so old guard, so out of touch, as to seriously call into question the deeper socio-political motives of a careless and detached individual.
Middleton,
Sure, “something” needs to be done, so whatever garbage Cannizzaro proposes, let’s do that. Those are the same types of hysterics that gave us such wonderful “reforms” ranging from the TSA and going all the way back to the Alien and Sedition Acts.
Instead, we should demand that Cannizzaro propose reasonable solutions that don’t unreasonably infringe upon our freedoms and are actually linked to violent crime. He’s not doing that, and worse than that, he doesn’t even seem to recognize the rights that are implicated here. I find that troubling, and so should you.
Did you sleep through Civics in high school?
It’s very simple what needs to be done and that’s to stop allowing the revolving door of career criminals to repeatedly plea bargain out of their felons in possession of firearms charges. The criminals in NOLA all seem to have extensive rap sheets going back into their youth. The youth justice system is where the problem starts as there are rarely any serious consequences and it is seen as more a right of passage than a stigma. We need to to start early with giving serious consequences to the violent youth offenders so they learn that it will be much more than a slap on the wrist to risk crime.
Then what do you propose, Owen, as a solution to getting illegal guns off the street?
Moses,
Better policing, and to the extent Cannizzaro is concerned about sentencing, better judges. But I can’t think of any new laws that are needed, and the ones proposed by Cannizzaro are misguided for the reasons I stated above. Open carry especially has nothing to do with violent crime.
Let’s hope Cannizzaro will come up with some proposals that will reduce gun violence.
Disqus,
We don’t need to wait. He showed his hand, and his ideas are poor.
You’re on your own with this one Owen. The few allies you may have with this argument are the fringe extremists. You’re still a young idealist, some wisdom only comes from the enlightenment of age and experience. A JD only takes you so far. Laws and constitutions are fluid documents subject to the winds of changing politics. Any special interest group can push a bill through with enough money.
LGD – I’m hardly on my own in this. Support for open carry is not a radical stance; it has been the law in Louisiana pretty much forever, and other states (like Texas, just next door) have been passing laws allowing open carry in recent years. Moreover, I would point you to the fact that 74% of Louisianans voted for strengthening gun rights in this state. It seems to me that those who want more stringent gun control are the real “fringe extremists.”
As for my youthful idealism, I’m 35 and I’ve been a practicing lawyer for over eight years. I’m fairly well-versed on these issues and I’m unlikely to change my mind a great deal. In any event, the law here is both clear and popular. Cannizzaro made a blunder here.
I think being 35 and having 8 years of experience practicing law firmly places you in the realm of “young” although I’m not sure I would label your argument ideal. Antiquated open carry laws are just that, there is no situation made better by openly carrying a firearm in a modern urban environment. If we can’t count on the police to protect us, then we as a community need to come together and find solutions to our policing problems. Individuals openly carrying firearms is outdated, very one dimensional, and a dangerously simplified solution to a complicated problem. What is this Tombstone? I am close to your age so I won’t pretend to have some wisdom bestowed upon me by age, but I do have enough common sense to know the open carry law that has been around forever has done nothing to prevent the violent crime blanketing the city. Furthermore I can’t think of anything that will boost tourism more than a bunch of gun wielding citizens out enjoying a lively night on the town, no danger in that scenario.
Police have no duty to protect you (according to the U.S. Supreme Court) and they can only respond after the fact to draw the chalk outline around your body. You are responsible for your own safety and a firearm is the greatest equalizer for protecting yourself and others yet devised. When seconds matter the police in NOLA are at least 30 minutes to hours away. Also why do you think “modern urban environments” are any different than ancient urban environments say like Rome. Humanity is still humanity and we have always had criminals and humans have ALWAYS had weapons to defend themselves equal to those that were attacking them.
a little condescending, n’est pas ? Far from fringe, many find courreges’ “urban libertarianism” quite refreshing.
The research is clear that concealed and open carry reduce crime!
Exactly none of the criticisms against this article have brought any substantive issue with the author’s points that (a) open carry has nothing to do with New Orleans’ crime problem and (b) Cannizzarro seems shockingly ignorant of what existing gun laws even say, yet he is speaking about writing new ones on the subject just for the sake of appearing to “do something.” I live Uptown and I trust myself to use a gun to protect myself vastly more than I trust (or expect) Cannizzaro or NOPD to do so. That is not “extreme;” that is reality. LGD’s comment about age and wisdom is amusing; if you can survive NOLA’s unmitigated crime spree long enough to be a Yoda like her, then life will be great with all of your constitutional protections stripped away as well.
As i understand it DA Cannizzaro can not obtain a conviction of gun laws already on the books such as fellon in possession of a firearm in criminal court of Orleans Parish – i have heard he doesnt even waste time with these charges because jusges and juries wont convict. If he can’t successfully convict that charge in Orleans Parish he has no business doubling down seeking more restrictive laws on non criminals. He should start by asking for mandatory sentencing for the crime of fellon in possession of a firearm and see how that works. Since he has not started with making it easier to convict and effectively sentence criminals with guns this rhetoric about open carry seems like more of a liberal populist political move as opposed to seeking an effective deterent of gun violence and it would seem the strict scrutiny added by constitutional amendment will get in the way of any proposed laws that follow the lead of his rhetoric.
I don’t know the answer but what we have right now isn’t working. It’s time to put emotions aside & look at the situation logically (if that’s possible). You would think that the many mass shootings would be enough of a reason to take a look at reworking some of the gun laws. I’m not saying to jerk all guns from the legal owners of them but try to use common sense so that we don’t wind up in a modern day version of the Wild West. Sadly, it appears that it’s going to take someone with the NRA or other big lobby group to experience a personal loss due to guns before anything can even be considered to change.
Brendan,
The problem is that people like Cannizzaro, who favor increased gun control, are pitching policies that have little to nothing to do with violent crime. I have never seen any evidence that open carry is linked to criminal activity. Quite the opposite; criminals virtually always conceal their weapons, which is why regulation of the intentional concealment of weapons has always been considered constitutionally valid.
In short, if there are changes to gun laws that could really impact violent crime, I’m not seeing them being proposed. Instead, I’m just seeing old policy sawhorses trotted out again that will hurt law-abiding gun owners with little to no impact on crime.
Firearm homicides have actually been trending down for several years according to FBI stats so what you are in fear of is the fear mongoring the 24 hour news cycle spews out at you along with the propaganda from those working to collapse our Second Amendment. We have more than enough firearms laws and we have plenty of stupid firearms laws that need to be rescinded. The government can’t even enforce current laws so adding new laws will do exactly ZERO. What might work is doing what Britain used to do and deport career criminals off to foreign lands so let’s start sending our career criminals off to banishment in Liberia and we will definitely see a drop in violence.
I think DAs and all lawyers who publicly state clearly unconstitutional agendas and attempt to blatantly side step our civil liberties should be immediately disbarred. Any elected government official should be immediately impeached as our sacred constitutional freedoms are just those and any seeking to step on them need to be treated as the tyrants they are.