Tag: Firearms Policy Coalition

Where the Buck Stops

Since President Donald J. Trump signed the “Protecting Second Amendment Rights” executive order in February, his Department of Justice has done exactly the opposite—relentlessly defending the federal government’s unconstitutional gun control regime. Instead of using the Justice Department’s vast power to secure Americans’ right to keep and bear arms, the Trump DOJ has used it to fight against the People—even taking extreme positions in court to resist injunctions that block the government’s enforcement of gun laws that federal judges have already found unconstitutional. [More]

Jeez, I talk like that and get readers telling the magazine if they don’t fire me they’re going to cancel their subscription…

What a refreshing change from all the groups that suck up to the guy afraid that if they get on his wrong side he’s going to call them names.

I wonder how Mark W. Smith is gonna spin this.

[Via Jess]

Beasts of Burden

“The State bears the burden of proving that its immoral scheme to criminalize rights is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition, and they will fail.” [More]

Actually, unless and until the Supreme Court rules in favor of the uninfringed right of the people to keep and bear arms, the burden will continue to be entirely borne by the state’s victims.

Split Personalities

Will a Republican majority make a difference in creating a circuit split?

[Via Jess]

‘Insanely Offensive’ is Right– So How Come NRA/GOA/SAF Aren’t Saying It?

“This insanely offensive brief should never have been filed in any court, let alone at the Fifth Circuit. It should be immediately withdrawn and thrown into the trash, along with Mr. Lemon’s ability to make these filings in the future. This is a prime example of why President Trump should appoint a competent Second Amendment czar to coordinate the administration’s agenda across the government and with stakeholders in Second Amendment litigation. Our rights must be protected at all costs and the American people are counting on President Trump and Attorney General Bondi to fulfill their promise to do just that.” [More]

This came out before my piece on gun group silence. I missed noting it in my AmmoLand piece because I was looking for reactions from national groups to include a more recent case where DOJ argued “Machine guns are atypical weapons not protected by the Second Amendment because a reasonable person would not expect them to be used in militia service,” and was specifically looking at the Big Three 501(c)(3)s that have political clout.

My major beef with FPC’s plan: I’ve explained it before: I don’t like “czar,” and anyone in that position would be feeding from the same hand. Gun owner advocates are owed a place at the table as members– we’re not dogs who should be grateful for scraps thrown down to us. It’s our table.

Union Organizers

Establish a Second Amendment Czar… Create and Staff a First and Second Amendment Section Within the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division … Enact Massive National Firearms Act (NFA) Arms Reforms [More]

For reasons I’ve explained before, “czar” doesn’t work for me, but a liaison with the Office of Second Amendment Protection sure would.

[Via Jess]

An Age-Old Question

FPC WIN: Fifth Circuit Strikes Down Federal Age-Based Handgun Ban [More]

No, of course that’s not the final word.

What will Trump’s DOJ and ATF do now?

Related UPDATE

Everytown for Gun Safety Throws Tantrum After 5th Circuit Finds Handgun Ban for 18-20 Year-Olds ‘Unconstitutional’ [More]

If you take a look at the college vote, they may have a point.

[Via bondmen]

Speaking of History, Text, and Tradition…

Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) and FPC Action Foundation (FPCAF) have filed an important new lawsuit challenging federal laws prohibiting licensed firearm dealers from selling handguns to out-of-state buyers. [More]

So when I read an authoritative historical article asserting “most of the early American rifles and pistols came from Eastern Pennsylvania,” why does it say nothing about out-of-colony buyers (and more)?

A Right Delayed

There comes a point where it’s simply unbelievable to say that judges actually think that way and aren’t perfectly aware of the tyranny they’re willing parts of.

[Via Jess]

Messin’ with Texas

Through the case, Plaintiffs seek to end enforcement of Texas laws that restrict firearm carry in three locations: (1) in any business where alcohol comprises 51% or more of sales (even if the individual is not consuming alcohol), (2) racetracks, and (3) sporting events. [More]

Despite its reputation, Texas has been late coming to the party on a lot of things.

[Via Jess]

A Good First Step

Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that Federal District Court Judge Iain D. Johnston has declared the State of Illinois’ ban on carrying firearms on public transportation and in public transportation facilities unconstitutional as applied to the named plaintiffs in the FPC-supported lawsuit Schoenthal v. Raoul. [More]

Good. But don’t overlook “The State is expected to appeal the decision.”

[Via Jess]

BATFE Slapping

Today, attorneys for Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) filed a merits-stage Respondents’ brief with the United States Supreme Court in FPC’s Garland v. VanDerStok lawsuit challenging ATF’s “Definition of ‘Frame or Receiver’ and Identification of Firearms” Rule. FPC’s brief, available at FPCLaw.org, explains why the government’s Rule cannot survive scrutiny and must fail. [More]

Here it is…

Mark W. Smith of The Four Boxes Diner breaks it down for us.

[Via Jess]

No Thanks to Vichycons

After helping the Democrats pass the bill, the Oregon House Republicans, in a cynical and disgraceful display of bait and switch, posed on the Capitol steps with a giant fake check that they said was going to be used for a lawsuit against the bill they had just helped pass…. Firearms Policy Coalition has announced their intention to fight this plainly unconstitutional law. They are currently seeking Oregon residents who could be plaintiffs in the case. This could be the fight so many have been waiting for. [More]

I’m if there are any creatures more self-servingly useless than Oregon establishment “Republicans”…

And They Say There Are No Stupid Questions…

California law bars non-residents from carrying a gun. Does that violate the Second Amendment? [More]

No one who is not a prohibitionist would even ask.

Or as Democrat Roger Taney wrote when horrified at the prospect of Dred Scott being considered a citizen:

“It would give to persons of the negro race, who were recognised as citizens in any one State of the Union, the right to enter every other State … and to keep and carry arms wherever they went.”

Wait… that last link is from Oath Keepers…? What are racist Nazi rightwing insurrectionists doing defending rights for all…?

There You Have It, They Want You Dead

By equating self-defense with murder, this contemptible Feinblatt… thing … obviously would have preferred Trayvon to have beaten George Zimmerman’s skull into the ground until he was dead. The same goes for anyone who uses a gun to keep an attacker from killing them.

There is no limit to these @$$holes’ lies.

Going Through the Motions

The district court judge in our lawsuit challenging the ATF’s “frame or receiver” rule granted Defense Distributed and 80 Percent Arms’ motions for injunction pending appeal, meaning it can’t be enforced against them while the case continues. [More]

If Founding Intent were applied to everything, the whole damn fraudulent house of cards would collapse.

[Via bondmen]

A Good First Step

Verified by MonsterInsights