Category: Second Amendment

An Age-Old Question

A federal judge in Minnesota on Friday struck down a state restriction limiting handgun carry permits to those over age 21, in a case brought by the Second Amendment Foundation, citing Second Amendment guidelines in last year’s Supreme Court Bruen ruling. The case is known as Worth v. Harrington. [More]

What does the historical tradition say?

UPDATE

Fun fact: The judge was appointed by President Biden… [More]

Yeah? Well, I’m Not a Huge Fan of Gunkapo Quislings.

“I’m not a huge fan of it, personally,” Stucker said of the move. “As a gun store owner, it puts a little bit more liability on us.” [More]

What did Samuel Adams say…?

Is this guy really that stupid, first for talking to the media like they’re honest brokers, and then for throwing his customers under the bus? I want to be careful here because it would have been easy to make assumptions about another gun guy until Herschel took the time to put things in context.

I’ll put out some feelers to our friends at Grassroots North Carolina and see if they can shed any light. Because without finding mitigating circumstances, my kneejerk reaction is to urge gun owners to find somewhere else to go and let this business die.

[Via Steve T]

Brace Yourselves

For the reasons discussed, the Court DENIES Plaintiffs’ request for injunctive relief or, in the alternative, for postponement of the Final Rule’s effective date (ECF No. 33). [More]

So infringements by swarms of officers are constitutional now…?

Oh, look! He was nominated by the Vote Freedom First President!

[Via Jess]

Who You Gonna Believe? Randi of Your Lyin’ Ears?

“It’s an epidemic that our great nation must solve. And how many lives will be shattered before we have the courage to do what Scotland did, what Australia did, what New Zealand did, what other great democracies do?” [More]

And in the best Jojo Krako tradition:

Who’s confiscatin’? We’re democratizin’!

That this Marxist hag has any influence at all over children’s “education” shows how successful the domestic enemies have been in their undermining of everything this Republic was supposed to stand for.

[Via Jess]

A Salvage Operation

DOJ is filing an appeal to overturn the district court’s preliminary injunction, and filing an emergency motion to stay, or halt, the portions of the order that would ban enforcement of the UHA’s requirements that semiautomatic pistols for retail sale have a chamber load indicator and magazine disconnect mechanism. The motion does not seek to immediately stop the part of the court’s decision enjoining the microstamping requirement. [More]

These bastards work in increments both ways. They’re trying to salvage what they can for now. They’ll come back for the rest later, assuming their subversions will assure enough dominance to control future courts.

You just gotta wonder what kind of Republicans would be stupid and/or treasonous enough to help them get an unchallengeable majority.

[Via Jess]

Restraining the Restrainers

In the Fifth Circuit, the entire Court has ruled, en banc, that rights protected by the Second Amendment may not be infringed by mere civil restraining orders. The unconstitutional infringement was placed into law by the infamous Lautenberg amendment in 1996. Hundreds of thousands of lives have been turned upside down and ruined by this infamous and unjust law. [More]

So unproven accusations by parties with vested interests aren’t enough?

That’s a Lot of Confiscations

Poll: One in Twenty Americans Own an AR-15 [More]

What about those who prefer AKs…?

How many enforcers are there again…? Field-ready, not the morbidly obese clerks. I assume they’ll go in teams (around where I live it generally takes four of them in big new SUVs to conduct a traffic stop), with after-action and arrest report paperwork, and each raid will take at least a day…

And that’s assuming everyone cooperates because those numbers could go down…

[Via HD]

Tangentially-Related UPDATE

KJP wont answer this burning question: is asked if Biden supports gun confiscation ? [Watch]

Of course, she won’t.

[Via Jess]

We’re the Only Ones Fine Enough

Police took semiautomatic rifles, a shotgun and handguns from the Rangers and said they arrested two gang members on previous warrants. None of the Rangers were arrested, though police were frustrated residents hadn’t called them sooner. ″There is a fine line between self-defense and vigilantism,” a police spokesman said, according to the AP. [More]

If the Rangers had been aiming to misbehave, they’d have been the ones disarming the police.

[Via Andy M]

The Better to Eat You With, My Dear

Attorneys representing the Second Amendment Foundation and its partners in a case concerning gun owner privacy in California have filed a respondent’s brief in the ongoing case of Barba v. Bonta, challenging the constitutionality of a 2021 law requiring the California Department of Justice (CAL/DOJ) to share extensive personal identifying information of gun owners in the state with a non-government research group. [More]

These guys…

In fairness, sneaking to violate privacy and rules just wasn’t cutting it.

Point/Counterpoint

Dave, like so many others you are in error concerning Heller’s statement on the M-16. Scalia wrote that anyone who say’s M-16s and the like can be banned have de facto separated and nullified the prefatory clause “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state,” from the operative “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

“It may be objected that if weapons that are most useful
in military service—M-16 rifles and the like—may be
banned, then the Second Amendment right is completely
detached from the prefatory clause.” [More]

He’s leaving out the big “but” that immediately follows:

But as we have said, the conception of the militia at the time of the Second Amendment’s ratification was the body of all citizens capable of military service, who would bring the sorts of lawful weapons that they possessed at home to militia duty.

Previously qualified as:

We therefore read Miller to say only that the Second Amendment does not protect those weapons not typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes, such as short-barreled shotguns. That accords with the historical understanding of the scope of the right…

I’ve posted this here because if I’m to get my other work done, I don’t have time to get embroiled in comments on AmmoLand, and besides, I get my say in the article and comments are for the readers.

And point of order…

Government Has Known from the Start There is a Right to Own Machineguns

“You see, if we made a statute absolutely forbidding any human being to have a machine gun, you might say there is some constitutional question involved.” [More]

Now, what are all those “staunch supporters of the Second Amendment” in Congress going to do about it?

97percent Deception

It also adopted a new test for Second Amendment cases. Gun laws today must be consistent with the laws that existed when the Second Amendment was adopted in the late 17 hundreds. This means that gun regulations will be assessed according to their conformity with laws that were in place during the 18th and 19th centuries. [More]

The 19th Century is not ” the late 17 hundreds.” I’ve been telling you these people were liars. These “kinder, gentler” citizen disarmament Astroturfers want us to believe “equal protection” means we’re now all subject to post-Civil War Black Codes introduced by Democrats a century after the Founders ratified the Bill of Rights.

“Our side” participating lends them underserved “credibility.”

Tangentially related, WarOnGuns Correspondent Jess shares a video on a First Amendment case raising similar points.