Category: Second Amendment

Carry On

10 Pro-Gun Americans on Why They Carry in Public [More]

MSN evidently thinks slide show click revenues warrant sidelining its typical anti-gun editorial sentiments now and then. Knowing what those are, I’m just surprised one of the given reasons wasn’t “to compensate for inadequate manhood.”

And pick a side, Ryan Thomas. This playing both sides of the street and then predicting blood in them for the DSM to spread around is unbecoming of someone who says he “believes” in RKBA.

It didn’t happen in Ohio, so stop trying to appeal to people who hate you.

[Via Remarks]

Rotten to the Core

At the center of this case is whether the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (“ATF”) properly interpreted the term “machinegun,” as defined in 26 U.S.C. § 5845(b), to include items known as non-mechanical bump stocks. [More]

And at the center of that is the question of where the hell any branch of government has the legitimate authority to infringe on the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

[Via Jess]

How About ‘No’?

SCOTUS to look at law barring accused domestic abusers from buying guns… As the Supreme Court justices race to finish up the current term, they will meet behind closed doors on Thursday to consider whether they should add a blockbuster Second Amendment case to the docket for next term. [More]

I’m not seeing where they did…

If you know differently, chime in.

[Via Jess]

We Don’t Have to Show You Any Stinking Separation of Powers!

Today, the U.S. Senate failed to block the Biden Pistol Brace Rule under the Congressional Review Act. The final vote, which was split along party lines, was 50-49. During debate, Democratic Majority Leader Chuck Schumer spread disinformation about pistol braced firearms, claiming that they convert pistols into machineguns. [More]

So where are all those “pro-gun Democrats” we’re assured are out there?

A Second Amendment Guy

“I’m a Second Amendment guy. I taught it for four years, six years in law school. And guess what? It doesn’t say that you can own any weapon you want. It says there are certain weapons that you just can’t own. Even during when it was passed, you couldn’t own a cannon. You can’t own a machine gun.… No, I’m serious.” [More]

Someone should dig up syllabuses, the texts he used, and some exams.

What a dog-faced pony soldier’s ass. That not one Democrat or “commonsense gun safety group” member feels compelled to publicly correct such blatant incompetence and dishonesty is all anyone needs to know their integrity.

[Via Michael G]

Mooting Cases Can Chill Incentives to Pursue Gun Denials

Who wants to spend years and substantial effort to force a correction and not even be able to recover costs? Who has those kinds of resources? [More]

Here’s another huge advantage that rights deniers with unlimited state resources have over gun owners of limited means.

Who will Judge the Judges?

A federal appeals court has restored most of New Jersey’s new gun control laws limiting firearms in sensitive public places after overturning a lower court ruling blocking many restrictions while a legal challenge plays out. [More]

Here’s the order. If someone gets killed as a result of it, I wonder how much sleep the judges will lose.

Krause was appointed by Obama and Chung was appointed by Biden. The one that concerns me here is Porter, appointed by Trump.

[Via Jess]

Something in Common

What Part of ‘In Common Use’ Don’t You Understand?: How Courts Have Defied Heller in Arms-ban Cases — Again [More]

What I still don’t understand: What if it’s not “in common use” by the public, but is by the military/LE, like post-’86 select-fire rifles?

I know what I say the answer is. I’d like to see it clearly stated by someone with legal gravitas and then challenged in court.

[Via Jess]

Help Wanted

Call or email Iverson. Remind her that Republicans inspired a lot of admiration while they were standing up. Remind her that you matter and you are furious that she would allow you to become a felon for exercising your rights. Remind her that walking out on clearly unconstitutional legislation is not an option, it’s a duty. And remind her that doing the right thing is a lot cheaper than a lawsuit. [More]

Or do nothing so that she only hears from a handful and presumes it’s safe to ignore them.