Category: Legal

Ruthless J6 Prosecutions Confirm the Ones Afraid of Oath Keepers are Oath Breakers

One way to keep a balking population in line is through the time-tested method of tyrants – cowing it into submission by making a highly publicized example of prominent members, which the J6 “uprising” at the Capitol more than provided. And no one was more high-profile in Oath Keepers than founder Stewart Rhodes, sentenced to 18 years in prison for “seditious conspiracy” and “obstruction of an official proceeding and tampering with documents and proceedings.” [More]

Part Three wraps up my series on why those in power are bent on utterly destroying the one concept that could render them powerless: Enforcers learning they have the power and the duty to say “No.”

Point/Counterpoint

As predicted by the Four Boxes Diner, in a 2-1 decision the US Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit— via a opinion by judges Wood and Easterbrook— have upheld Illinois’s “assault weapon” ban. However there is a strong dissent here. This decision is no shock to Four Boxes Diner viewers because as I explained before, in my view, Judge Wood and Judge Easterbrook are unserious jurists on 2A issues and this was a given outcome (unfortunate and frustrating, yes, but entirely predictable). [More]

Meanwhile, over in Fantasy Land…

The Immunity Syndrome

When Matthew sued the judge for these egregious violations of constitutional rights, Goldston argued that she could not be sued even if she had violated the Constitution by invoking judicial immunity. [More]

Making people you persecute believe they have no legal recourse seems like an invitation to try it another way.

[Via Michael G]

Delay of Game

California’s assault weapons ban will remain in effect while a court considers whether the 30-year-old law is unconstitutional. [More]

That a court thinks there’s anything to consider is our first clue that the game is rigged.

I think we all know that the Ninth Circuit is going to side with citizen disarmament and it’ll take SCOTUS strapping ’em on to get a proper ruling–provided the Republicans don’t blow ’24 and the composition of the High Court changes while the clock is running.

Not that that would settle it…

[Via Jess]

We’re the Only Ones Untargeting Enough

“There is no evidence that she was attempting to kill anyone. Essentially what they are doing is they’re taking the offense of shooting into a vehicle and saying that she was attempting to kill somebody,” Fernandez’s lawyer argued. [More]

What’s the lawyer’s name? I’d like to ask him if there’s any legal whoring he won’t do.

Interesting people they give armed authority over you and me to…

[Via Steve T]

Back to Square One?

Hunter Biden legal team may need to overhaul defense strategy in gun case [More]

That drives the timing on resurrecting one FOIA and pressing one complaint:

And point of order on that “second gun”– the (extremely NSFW!) Marco Polo report, at the top of page 282, claims:

“Five days after he illegally obtained a .38 caliber handgun, Hunter solicited a female to the Red Roof Plus+ in Newark. During the tryst, he posed with what he claimed was a black ‘airgun,’” [further identified in a footnote as a] “PT-80 Semi-Auto .177 Cal. CO2 Pellet Pistol 8 shot magazine from GAMO.”

No?

In any case, I’m interested in finding out if any report raised the question of Biden lying on the 4473 before this one.

[Via Dan Gifford]

On the Gunny Side of the Street

Among other restrictions, the law bans the public carry of firearms at designated sensitive locations and institutes a default ban on carrying firearms on private property without express permission from the property owner. [More]

WarOnGuns Correspondent JR asks if a public easement means you can be armed on private property traversed by a sidewalk.

On Appeal

Our lawsuit was consolidated with five others also suing the governor over her order. Last night, after consulting with our fellow parties, we filed an appeal with the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals challenging the decision on the preliminary injunction. [More]

The state has unlimited tax plunder to use against us. While footing their bill, don’t forget to foot ours.

We’re the Only Ones Conspiring Enough

North Carolina and North Dakota Police Chiefs and Federal Firearms Licensees Indicted for Conspiracy to Illegally Acquire Machineguns and Other Firearms. [More]

Amidst all the outrage over Larry Vickers, let’s not forget we all have the right to such firearms the chiefs claimed for themselves but would arrest us for. I also find it difficult to comprehend how an FFL and recognized expert, versed in all the traps and pitfalls, could stumble into such a huge one himself.

[Via Jess]

The Same Except They’re Different

The argument that commercially available, AR-type firearms are somehow less dangerous or lethal simply because they fire only in semi-automatic mode is misleading. They retain the identical performance capabilities and characteristics (save full-automatic capability) as initially intended for use in combat. [More]

Oh, is that all? Spread that lie under oath!

Also from the linked Exhibit:

As mentioned previously in this report, many of the firearms prohibited by the Ordinances directly trace their origins to those developed for use in combat. As such, these firearms were never initially intended for general distribution or sale to the public.

Except if we’re talking ARs, and of course he is, guess which one came first:

“Colt sent a pilot model rifle (serial no. GX4968) to the BATF for civilian sale approval on Oct. 23, 1963. It was approved on Dec. 10, 1963, and sales of the ‘Model R6000 Colt AR-15 SP1 Sporter Rifle’ began on Jan 2, 1964,” one critic of the article contended. “The M16 wasn’t issued to infantry units until 1965 (as the XM16E1), wasn’t standardized as the M16A1 until 1967, and didn’t officially replace the M14 until 1969.”

Tell me this Yurgealitis trough feeder isn’t cognizant of Founding intent and is incentivized by those who fear that and obscure it through gaslighting.

And tangentially related:

As predicted, they’re taking full advantage of Scalia’s critical error.

In re later “Bowie knives” edicts and the like, does anyone have a record of such laws ever being challenged on Second Amendment grounds and such bans being upheld and/or appealed to a higher court?

We’re the Only Ones Fishing Enough

Like geofence warrants, keyword warrants cast a dragnet that require a provider to search its entire reserve of user data—in this case, queries by one billion Google users. Police generally have no identified suspects; instead, the sole basis for the warrant is the officer’s hunch that the suspect might have searched for something in some way related to the crime. [More]

Ah, the old Inspector Clouseau theory of policing…

So what happens if you use Duck Duck Go?

[Via Michael G]

A Law Unto Herself?

A new Oklahoma judge could lose her job for sending more than 500 texts to her bailiff during a murder trial, including messages mocking the prosecutor, praising the defense attorney and calling a key witness a liar. [More]

Before kneejerk accepting AP’s spin on things, I’m wondering how much of that is subjective and if running on “vowing to defend our constitution” plays any part…

[Via Michael G]

Verified by MonsterInsights