SUPREME COURT Slams AR15 Case 2026 Gun Rights Status Check [Watch]
More balking around the edges when the true issue is invalidating NFA and all infringements, which won’t happen unless there’s a credible “or else” backing up the demand.
Tag: “assault weapons”
As the Shoulder Thing Goes Up
The real outrage is Nancy Maldanado was confirmed to the Seventh Ciruit 47-43, and seven Republicans didn’t vote.
[Via DDS]
O Canada
None Dare Call It Treason
Seeberger has since resolved to support “whatever it takes” to make Minnesota safer. “I’ll be yes on anything and everything that comes through that will really make a difference to reduce gun violence here in the state of Minnesota,” she said in a recent interview. [More]
So why is this oath-breaking useful idiot still being referred to as a “moderate legislator”?
[Via Michael G]
Survey SAYS…
Official Everytown for Gun Safety Poll … Should Congress ban assault weapons? [More]
I wish those saying “Absolutely” would flesh out what they estimate an attempt will cost in human lives lost to “gun violence” and how that compares to reality…
They won’t tally your response unless you give them contact info, so I resurrected a tactic from the old Million Moon March.
I wonder if ATF’s number takes texts?
Won’t Take ‘No’ for an Answer
How many times do they need to be rejected before they become stalkers?
Actually, it’s not that he doesn’t want to. It’s just that they’re frustrated he can’t satisfy them and are complaining to the neighbors about it.
Shall Not Be Infringed UNLESS…?
Viramontes’s criticism of Bevis on this point carries little weight, given Heller’s holding that “the Second Amendment does not protect those weapons not typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes[.]” Id. at 625. Heller did not hold, as Viramontes seems to imply, that military-style weapons are protected “arms” because military action by civilians is lawful. Instead, Heller characterized self-defense as the “core lawful purpose” of firearm use. 554 U.S. at 630. [More]
I beg to differ. And have warned that ignoring the militia aspect would be used against us.
Funny, how a common prohibitionist argument is that 2A advocates ignore the first 13 words, and here it is they’re doing just that in their legal argument.
In any case, the amendment says “arms.” And as for the contention that its ban “finds support in this nation’s history and tradition,” tell that to Tench Coxe.
F-n’ lying Illinois Democrats…
[Via Jess]
The Servants Have Spoken
In response to a question of whether the people decide subjectively what they deem appropriate for self-defense, New Jersey argued that “the people” through their representatives decide what is unusually dangerous based on their perception of “objective characteristics.” As one judge suggested, since all firearms are dangerous under the alleged dangerous-or-unusual test, no limit would exist on what the legislature may choose to ban, despite what the people choose. [More]
Look at all the contortions these robed Democrats go through to obfuscate the unambiguous clarity of “shall not be infringed.”
How many horses and hounds may I keep, again…?
[Via Michael G]
O Canada
“This program is really a way to help lawful gun owners stay in compliance with the law.” [Watch]
Talk about industrial grade weasel wording… and what a perfect example of actual fascist mentality.
Then we have Thing 2, a frickin’ Sri Lankan refugee who repays the people who took him in with “Obey of die” mandates.
According to what the premier’s spokesperson told me, Alberta’s response is “Not on our watch.”
Where Kash is King?
FBI Director Says ‘Assault Weapon Ban’ Could ‘Prevent Future Attacks’ in Some Instances, Declines to Endorse Legislation [More]
We got us a Kash flow problem…
To Each According to His Needs?
COURTROOM AUDIO LIVE: AR & Mag Ban Arguments Reveal How Nefarious These Blue States Actually Are… [Watch]
You don’t need full auto because the government has it? We’re limited to “self-defense”? And only indoors? Anybody see the word “useful” in the Second Amendment…?
Are “average” <3-round limits next?
Everybody’s picking up that it’s “common usage” arguments they’re arguing to impose limits, right?
[Via Jess]
Confirmation Bias Writ Large
So, decided to dig a bit on her and SURPRISE!!! Since 2019, she’s been an active donor to Democrat politicians who call for the same thing she is. She’s an active activist Democrat. [More]
Just building on a narrative…
[Via Non_Fudd’s Ghost]
The Beginning of a Beautiful Friendship?
Following its amicus brief in support of us, the federal government has asked the Seventh Circuit for approval to participate in oral arguments in our lawsuit challenging Illinois’ “assault weapon” and magazine bans [More]
How could they refuse? After all, “Currently, six of the court’s judges were appointed by Republicans and five by Democrats.”
Yeah, but one of those “Republicans” is treasonous dotard Frank Easterbrook…
[Via Jess]
Talk is Cheap
Who Couldn’t See That Coming?
The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said groups challenging a 2013 law banning assault weapons and a second gun control law enacted a decade later could not show that the guns they are still able to possess, including several semi-automatic handguns, are not sufficient for self-defense purposes. [More]
And no, I don’t think they’re embarrassed at all. I think they’re in-our-face about it.
[Via Jess]
The Stupidest Thing You’ll Read on the Internet All Day
you use meme magic or whatever to get people to throw them out. we both know the proliferation of AI, FYPs, etc are extremely powerful. people were memed into buying the guns, they can be memed out of it. [More]
Thing is, it’ll work as well as all the other plans.
If You Don’t Ask, You Don’t Get
The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and its partners have petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court for review in Viramontes v. Cook County, SAF’s challenge to the Cook County, Ill., ban on so-called “assault weapons.” [More]
I was happy to see that it did not neglect to include:
The text of the Second Amendment itself proclaims that one of its purposes was to preserve the “militia” and, to state the obvious, the militia did not exist solely to promote individual self-defense but rather was “useful in repelling invasions and suppressing insurrections,” “render[ed] large standing armies unnecessary,” and enabled the people to be “better able to resist tyranny”. Indeed, to the extent there is a historical tradition with respect to “military” arms, it is to afford them especially strong protection.
Tangentially Related Development
The U.S. Supreme Court has distributed a Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) case, Madison Lara v. Commissioner Pennsylvania State Police, for conference to be held on Monday, Sept. 29. [More]
Split Personalities
Justice Filing Brief in Illinois Gun Ban Case a Long Overdue Change in Course
Still, the brief adds some important points that an ultimate Supreme Court decision will need to consider: Among recognized “uses by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes” are “self-defense, target shooting, and public defense,” that last category touching on the core purpose the Framers had in mind as articulated in the first 13 words of the Second Amendment. [More]
My latest from Firearms News looks at a long called for DOJ action in support of the Second Amendment that matches its new words.
Rhode Island Reds
Rhode Island’s Democratic-controlled state House on Friday approved legislation that would ban the sale and manufacturing of many semiautomatic rifles commonly referred to as assault weapons. The proposal now heads to the desk of Democratic Gov. Dan McKee, who said in a post on the social platform X on Friday evening that he plans to sign the bill into law. [More]
Dan does have his priorities…
And note how AP characterizes them as “weapons of choice.”
I guess that’s always depended on what lie you wanted to perpetuate.
[Via Jess]
