SAF SUES HAWAII OVER GUN BAN FOR YOUNG ADULTS, SEEKS INJUNCTION [More]
I’m glad to see they’ve got Alan Beck on board.
Notes from the Resistance
Ninth Circuit to rehear Hawaii butterfly knife ban… In its en banc petition, the state only briefly touched on historical arms regulations in its pre-territorial days. However, the state Supreme Court recently harkened back to the Kingdom of Hawaii — which historically levied heavy regulations on weapons — while pushing back on the Second Amendment. [More]
We’re talking Stephen Stamboulieh and Alan Beck’s case,
Judge ReTodd Eddins thinks “the spirit of Aloha” is the supreme law of the land there? I know they had history and tradition– did they have text? And does that spirit mean they’re bringing back Kapu?
Mark W. Smith thinks this may backfire.
[Via Jess]
It should be a straightforward enough process and you’d think the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Department of Justice would be on the same page, instead of pointing fingers, abdicating responsibilities, and just plain getting things wrong, especially considering how they increasingly hold Federal Firearms Licensees to “zero tolerance standards” over paperwork glitches. [More]
It took fear of getting spanked by the court, but they finally, grudgingly agreed to an appeals process.
US Court of Appeal for Ninth Circuit declared Hawaii’s butterfly knife ban to be unconstitutional under the 2nd Amendment. Hawaii hires $2400 per hour attorney to try to save the BAN but 2nd Amendment briefs are terrific and should prevail. [Watch]
Major props for Alan Beck and Stephen Stamboulieh who routinely take to the field to battle mercenaries.
[Via Herschel]
9th Circuit overturns Hawaii butterfly knife ban, citing Supreme Court ‘history’ standard on guns [More]
More fine work from Alan Beck and Stephen Stamboulieh…
I notice Adam Winkler whining about Bruen creating an “impossible position.” Why they ever invited this guy to GRPC is beyond me– it’s not like he’s a pal.
Can you imagine if we started challenging other tyrannical edicts and programs based on historical understanding at the time of ratification? It could change everything.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs request that judgment be entered in their favor and against Defendants as follows: 1. An order preliminarily and permanently enjoining Defendants, their officers, agents, servants, employees, and all persons in active concert or participation with them who receive actual notice of the injunction, from enforcing 720 ILCS 5/24-1(a)(6) and any other applicable law which prohibits Plaintiffs from owning and banning the acquisition, possession, carrying or use of suppressors; 2. An order declaring that 720 ILCS 5/24-1(a)(6) and any other applicable law which prohibits Plaintiffs from owning suppressors is unconstitutional and violates the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution; 3. An order declaring 720 ILCS 5/24-1(a)(6) and any other applicable law which prohibits plaintiffs from owning suppressors unenforceable… [More]
Stamboulish and Beck, naturally…
[Via Jess]