Madeline Singas (a Democrat), Acting District Attorney of Nassau County, NY, forbids Assistant District Attorneys (ADAs) working for her to own a handgun.  From the official employment application form, which is followed by a signature line:

“I understand that assistant district attorneys are not permitted to apply for a handgun permit nor own or possess a handgun while employed by the Nassau County District Attorney.”

In other words, as a condition of employment within the county DA’s office, ADAs may not so much as own a handgun at any time, at any place, for any reason.  The ban is not restricted to possession at the office, or courtroom, or any other place of official business (which could be reasonable; I do not allow guns in my office).  ADAs may not own one at all: not for personal defense away from a work setting; not for protection at home; not for sport; not for hobby collecting.  They may not so much as apply for a permit, even if they do not follow through with a handgun purchase.

Singas is up for election; perhaps this policy is red meat for the Democrat-leaning county.  She is an aggressive self-promoter.  (The official Web site of the DA office is a virtual political advertisement for her.) (1)  Perhaps this is strictly an ideological decision.  New York state has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the Union; in such a political environment, perhaps she simply believed that such an edict would pass without notice.

I do not deny Singas’ right to prohibit guns in a workplace she leads; she may legally do that.  But by what authority can she forbid an employee – as a condition of employment – from exercising, on personal time and in private environs, a right explicitly recognized by the U.S. Constitution?

Reading this story, I could not help but think of Kim Davis, she of gay-marriage-license-denial fame.  Davis – also a Democrat – has been exposed and condemned for two months, in media outlets large and small (a few weeks ago, a story about her was on the front pages of the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the Los Angeles Times, all on the same day), by renowned commentators, and in social media.  For refusing to extend a right granted by federal law, she was jailed by a federal judge.

I have not found a source listing the exact number of ADAs in Nassau County, but 22 are active on LinkedIn.  So at least 22 people are right now being denied a Constitutional right by Madeline Singas.  This is exactly 22 people more than were unable to secure a marriage license because of Kim Davis. (2)

If gay people cannot be denied the right to marry (a right I support) by a county official, thanks to a Supreme Court ruling only a few months old, can another county official deny employees a right that was ratified into the Constitution 226 years ago?  I look forward to massive media coverage, the condemnation of pundits, a flood of outraged Facebook posts, and the fury of the Left, all equal to that directed at Kim Davis.

Footnotes:

1. The home page features a montage of photos and stories; each photo features Singas front and center; each story begins “Acting DA Singas…”
2. Kentucky law allows residents 18 years or older to obtain a marriage license in any of the state’s 120 counties, not just the county of residence. Anyone denied a marriage license in Kim Davis’ Rowan County Clerk’s office could have acquired one in 119 other counties in the state, including the seven which border Rowan county: “The bride and groom may go to any county in Kentucky to get a marriage license as long as both are 18 years of age or older. Marriage licenses may be used in any Kentucky county and cannot be used anywhere but in Kentucky.”

Granted, I’m biased toward nuclear power, as that is the industry my business serves, but the new U.S. reactors coming online later this year and in the next few years, will provide clean electricity at a price and capacity factor (think reliability) that no other source of electricity can match.  Solar and wind power can’t manage even half the CF that nuclear provides every year.

As one of my favorite blog commentators likes to say: If you don’t support nuclear power, you’re not serious about reducing carbon emissions from electrical generation.