Firearms Policy Coalition Statement Regarding Membership [More]
So essentially, federal court rules created turn equal protection for pistol braces on its head?
[Via Jess]
Notes from the Resistance
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?
I have never given up hope that the collector’s item I got so I’d have standing will one day be surrendered back to me by ATF.
I wonder if SCOTUS will forever punt, and what the implications will be for pistol braces, forced reset triggers, and the like.
[Via WiscoDave]
Latest Supreme Court-related ruling overturning gun regulations worries domestic violence survivor advocates [More]
Yeah, well their demands to throw due process out the window and eviscerate the rights of those inclined to obey disarmament edicts without due process is the more worrisome prospect.
[Via Jess]
The question presented in this case is not whether prohibiting the
possession of firearms by someone subject to a domestic violence restraining order is a laudable policy goal. The question is whether 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8), a specific statute that does so, is constitutional under the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution. In the light of N.Y. State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n, Inc. v. Bruen, 142 S. Ct. 2111 (2022), it is not. [More]
If only there were a better way…