Category: Second Amendment

We’re the Only Ones Unreasonable Enough

Ccrkba

“The police must have reasonable suspicion that the person is possessing the gun illegally or otherwise engaged in criminal activity,” wrote Judge Kathryn Grill Graeff. “Because the officers here stopped appellant based solely on his possession of a gun, without reasonable suspicion that he was possessing the gun illegally or otherwise involved in criminal activity, they did not have reasonable suspicion to stop him. The stop, therefore, violated appellant’s Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable seizures.” [More]

Baltimore police are d_s when it comes to guns? Who knew?

Virginia Prosecutors Defy New ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban

553618 virginia prosecuters refuse enforce gun ban 01 hero 1200x800

The ban “is striking at the core of the militia system that existed in Virginia,” Mehaffey informed Fox News, showing he is one of the few public officials who “gets it,” or is at least willing to publicly acknowledge that reality. [More]

I know of some federal prosecutors who could follow suit — and are running out of excuses not to.

A Right Delayed

Why?

But the judge issued an order stopping everything. And here’s the kicker. He did it because of a move pulled by the anti-gun Attorney General Jay Jones. The state is using a rule called the Multiple Claimant Litigation Act. Because gun owners are fighting back in four different counties across Virginia, the attorney general petitioned the Virginia State Supreme Court to clump all four of those lawsuits together and move them to one single court. Most likely a court where they think a judge will side with the state. A la Richmond.

[Via Jess]

Of Course You Realize This Means War

Osborn proposed a preemptive “red flag” law targeting owners of “assault-style rifles,” which would require gun owners to undergo a mental health evaluation every five years to re-register those weapons. [More]

How many divisions does Osborn have?

What an @$$hole.

[Via Edmund M]

The NeverEnding Story

At least 16 states have now put 3D gun laws on the books, with seven states adding major legislation this year. [More]

And, of course, it’s not just 3D guns they want to ban.

So… how many lawsuits must rights advocates pay for, in how many districts and circuits, with no clear resolve on the part of the Supreme Court to order “shall not be infringed,” on Congress to pass sanctions, and on DOJ to enforce rights? Bits and pieces are offered and bits and pieces are taken back. But it will never happen unless and until there is a clear “or else” promise behind our demands.

Anybody seeing a groundswell that can’t be ignored for that?

The Out-of-Touch Untouchable

Grnc

The clock is ticking. The 2025–2026 legislative session has roughly two to three weeks remaining, and HB 674 — Rep. Jay Adams’ Firearms Liberty Act, which would establish lifetime concealed handgun permits for law-abiding North Carolinians — is sitting idle in the Senate Rules Committee. The House has already done its job. HB 674 passed the House and now waits on the Senate to act. Senate Rules Chair Bill Rabon controls whether this bill gets a committee hearing — or dies quietly without one. That choice is his. And right now, he’s making the wrong one. [More]

You can tell a lot about “Republicans” when you see how they behave when the votes tell them they are politically invulnerable. This guy thinks he doesn’t even have to try, as evidenced by his discontinued website and paying no attention to his X account for years.

I don’t suppose he’d be interested in no permits at all…?

On a Sauer Note

[T]he Supreme Court has just denied cert in a case where the solicitor general of the United States under Donald Trump actually wanted the court to take it. This is huge great news folks because it is signaling that the Supreme Court is done with criminals defending the right to keep and bear arms and much more likely to let law-abiding ordinary citizens vindicate their rights. This is a big deal, folks, because as you know, those 18 USC 922G cases are problematic because their bad facts make bad law. [Watch]

I’m more concerned with the fact that the SG knows that and proceeded anyway. After all, didn’t NSSF tell us, “USA Today and gun control groups [were] in a tizzy [because] U.S. Solicitor General John Sauer wrote, ‘The United States has a substantial interest in the preservation of the right to keep and bear arms and in the proper interpretation of the Second Amendment…'”?

And Smith himself declares “Prosecutorial discretion has always been a part of our legal system.”

So why does this seem to be a tradition with “pro-gun”Republican administrations?

Never forget:

We condemn any program that involves enforcing unconstitutional “laws”, even if such “laws” are enforced only against violent criminals. Unconstitutional “laws” are illegal, harmful to public safety, tyrannical, and are inevitably enforced against ordinary, non-criminal citizens.

[Via Jess]

Ecclesiastes 1:9

Virginia’s central argument is that Article I, Section 13 of the Virginia Constitution is not an individual Second Amendment-style right at all. According to the Commonwealth, Section 13 is a “collective, militia-tethered right,” meaning the right to keep and bear arms is tied to militia service rather than individual self-defense. [More]

There is no new thing under the sun.

And Opposite Day “progressives” keep coming back with the same tired, old, debunked revisionist lies.

SCOTUS Refusal to Address School Ban on Gun Imagery Puts Freedom 250 Art Contestants at Risk

School 2A Rights SCOTS AI CHAT GPT

Teachers have been known to report students over perceived off-campus gun concerns before, even when no cause for them existed. [More]

Submitting a historically accurate entry could run afoul of “zero tolerance” intolerance.

Meanwhile, Over in the Birthplace of the Second Amendment…

Massachusetts Public School District Permits Sikh Students to Carry Knives While Banning Weapons for All Other Students [More]

Well, Vivek did tell us “The idea of a heritage American is … loony.”

Heritage Sikhs, not so much.

[Via bondmen]

The Answer May Also Be ‘Yes’

Do Trans People Have “Stand Your Ground” Rights? Wyoming’s Answer May Be “No.” [More]

“May be” or “is”?

That’s what we have trials for.

Why do I have the feeling we’re not getting the whole story here?

Maybe because phrases like “people disproportionately targeted for harassment and violence” misdirect on who’s doing the abuse, something the gun prohibitionists don’t seem to want to point out.

[Via Michael G]

Curses! Foiled Again!

Although the Maryland appellate courts have, for decades, upheld police stops based on reasonable suspicion that a person is in possession of a gun, after Bruen, carrying a handgun publicly for self-defense is presumptively lawful, and therefore, mere possession of a concealed firearm, by itself, is not indicative of criminal activity. The mere possibility that a person with a gun might not have a valid license or otherwise may be restricted from possessing a gun is not enough to establish reasonable suspicion for a seizure. The police must have reasonable suspicion that the person is possessing the gun illegally or otherwise engaged in criminal activity. [More]

“Only Ones” constrained by rights? Oh, go on…

[Via Jess]

Tsunami Warning

What’s in the Trump administration’s ‘tsunami’ of gun deregulation [More]

Oh, no! Infringing on infringements! Head for higher ground!

Because we all know how ATF rules affect predator decision-making.

“Real reporter” Avery Lotz carries the prohibitionists’ water for them.

She probably also believes repeating talking points can’t ultimately be done a lot cheaper by AI.

[Via Michael G]