Category: Legal

Another Write-up

Judge shuts down gun rights activist’s attempt to shed light on Hunter Biden’s alleged gun crimes [More]

Unlike most of the other reports, I appreciate the links and the recognition in this one. There’s still nothing about it, of course, in the “Lies of Omission” major media.

Not to tease, but there’s still a chance this might not be over that I can’t give details on yet.

Republicans haven’t had much luck, either, but my suspicion is their move was more pre-midterms motivated. You’ll forgive me if I don’t have a lot of confidence in a GOP-controlled House Oversight Committee doing much more than making self-serving noise.

Still, it tells us all we need to know about the Democrats.

Collusion by Any Other Name

Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen, along with Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti and a coalition of 22 other states, is alerting the Chief Executive Officers of three major credit card companies that the recent creation of a Merchant Category Code for the processing of firearms purchases from gun stores is potentially a violation of consumer protection and antitrust laws. [More]

You fellas are going to have to do more than alert them.

At Least They Spelled My Name Right*

U.S. District Court Judge Rudolph Contreras, a President Barack Obama appointee, ruled Tuesday against plaintiff David Codrea’s request to have federal records regarding Hunter Biden’s 2018 gun purchase released. [More]

Seeing as how I broke this development, was the first to point out the 4473 implications, and the only one to notice the laptop video involved a second gun, would it have killed you guys to give me a link?

In any case, the majors aren’t touching this. Neither are the grabbers.

[Via Keith B]

* With the exception of the case cite…

UPDATE

The Google alert…

Most of the entries are copied off the Politico piece.

Aside from most avoiding a link to the original report, the other thing they have in common is none of them are big outfits, which would just as soon nobody talk about this.

‘Activist Investor Lawfare’?

KE Arms Sued: What GWACS Armory Doesn’t Want You To Know — A Lawyer Explains [Watch]

As I indicated earlier, I don’t know anything about this and won’t have time to learn. There’s only one of me and the plate is overflowing with other priorities and commitments already. Full disclosure: I didn’t even have time to watch this 19-minute video in its entirety, either.

I post this as an information resource for those of you who do have an interest in this matter. If you have intel to add, from either side, please feel free to leave relevant comments.

[Via Jess]

I Don’t Know Enough to Take Sides

KE Arms is fighting to defend itself from a shameful legal assault by GWACS Armory and Reed Oppenheimer, activist millionaire. They have racked up massive legal bills from the two years of lawsuit that have already passed, and with a trial scheduled for later this year the bills will only increase. If they are not able to see this through to completion, the KP-15 monolithic polymer lowers and the WWSD 2020 rifles along with them will disappear. [Watch]

I’ll stipulate up front I have no familiarity with these products, this situation, or any of the players and claims involved, and can’t foresee making an effort to find out more.

[Via Jess]

The War on Citizens

Under the new law, entire categories of crime, such as aggravated batteries, robberies, burglaries, hate crimes, aggravated DUIs, vehicular homicide, drug induced homicides, all drug offenses, including delivery of fentanyl and trafficking cases, are not eligible for detention no matter the severity of the crime or the defendant’s risk to a specific person or the community, unless the People prove by clear and convincing evidence the person has a “high likelihood of willful flight to avoid prosecution.” Additionally, in cases involving non-probationable forcible felonies, such as murder and armed robbery, judges may only detain a defendant under the new law if the prosecution proves by clear and convincing evidence the defendant “poses a real and present threat to the safety of a specific, identifiable person or persons.” [More]

Establishing Justice, insuring domestic Tranquility, providing for the common defence, promoting the general Welfare, and securing the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, again, I see…

Y’know, any government that fails to do the above has given up any claim of legitimacy for the consent of the governed, and whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it.

That’s probably why ruling Democrats want our guns.

[Via Jess]

A Multipronged Attack

On September 7, 2022, the National Foundation for Gun Rights filed five new lawsuits in four federal court circuits to eliminate unconstitutional magazine and gun bans everywhere! Combined with our lawsuits in Colorado these represent nearly half of the country. This nationwide legal blitz aims to take out every single ban on semi-automatic weapons and standard capacity magazines for good. [More]

I’d feel better about these if the lawsuits included acknowledgment of core purpose and that the function of the Militia, defined as “all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense [and] bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time,” was — and still is — to field citizen soldiers. These citizens bore arms that were suitable for that purpose, “ordinary military equipment” intended to be taken into “common defense” battles.

That said, isn’t it time for SAF to make peace with Dudley?

[Via Jess]

Overlooking Two Essentials

New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen: Originalism and the Relevance of Common Law and Reconstruction-Era Restrictions on Exercise of a Right [More]

David T. Hardy’s new law review manuscript is online. He concludes the majority made some shaky assumptions, too.

I’ve got some reading to do. Looks like no “Dancing with the Stars” for me tonight…

Could’a Been a Contender

In this video I discuss two important Second Amendment case that are up for Supreme Court consideration next term which could help stop the ATF’s current actions. [Watch]

All SCOTUS needs to do to allow ATF to continue usurping legislative authority is…nothing.

Then, of course, the case could be made that any legislative authority contradicting “shall not be infringed” is a usurpation in itself.

[Via Jess]

Insult to Injury

“I’ve been told nothing,” he said. “I’m so in the dark every time … Why does (the officer) have a lawyer, while we have nothing? We have no voice”… [More]

Sir, you’ve answered your own question. You’re going to need to get a lawyer.

[Via bondmen]

All Writs Now, Baby, It’s All Writs Now

Attorneys representing the Second Amendment Foundation and its partners in the case of Jones v. Bonta, challenging a California law restricting the rights of young adults to purchase long guns, are asking the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for an “All Writ” enjoining the state from enforcing a new state law that penalizes plaintiffs in cases contesting state gun laws. [More]

Why should arrogant tyrants who ignore the Second Amendment with impunity have any respect for the First?

Bruen 2.0

Plaintiffs seek a declaration that New York’s limitations of and burdens on the right to carry firearms as enacted in Senate Bill 51001 (“SB51001”) and as otherwise detailed below are unconstitutional under the First, Second, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. Plaintiffs also seek an injunction compelling Defendants to refrain from enforcing those invalid limitations. [More]

Unless and until the in-your-face stonewallers face personal consequences, they know they’ll have virtually limitless plunder resources to draw from. And if they can wait things out, the plan is for total control so that current legal decisions will no longer impede.

[Via Jess]

Verified by MonsterInsights