Notes from the Resistance
Attorney General Pam Bondi has announced that the DOJ does not believe that the McCoy vs ATF should be the next 2A SCOTUS case. Why did DOJ say this? Mark Smith, Four Boxes Diner, discusses [Watch]
I’m not afraid to say so when I think he’s not being objective considering all factors, or just generally playing see-no-evil administration cheerleader. That said, I think he’s correct here.
[Via Jess]
Bondi’s DOJ Defends Unconstitutional Handgun Sales Ban — Another Betrayal of Trump’s Pro-Gun Agenda [More]
Maybe they need to up the lithium…
This is where I gotta address an administration apologist, attorney, author, and YouTube “gunfluencer Mark W. Smith of Four Boxes Diner fame, who seems to always find excuses for such disappointments and who doesn’t much like those of us who dare point out disconnects. But before I elaborate, I’ll stipulate he’s got me outmatched with academic and legal credentials, and that I’ll never win a Gundie (or for that matter, a bathing suit contest). And don’t get me wrong– I really do appreciate much of what he does. Just not all.
I’ll also stipulate that Donald Trump has done more to advance 2A than any president in my lifetime. We can help him do better, but not if we ignore infringements pushed by “our side.”
Here’s a direct quote, noting commentary like this is peppered throughout this presentation and increasingly showing up in others:
And it reiterates my point on this channel that a lot of those people in the Second Amendment community, and you know exactly who you are. You anti-Trumpers in the Second Amendment community whining and complaining about nonsensical things, about Amy Coney Barrett on one day, Pam Bond on another day, Donald Trump on another day, and you know exactly who you are .
Yeah, I know exactly who I am. Does he? Because if he thinks that’s why “we” do this, it makes me wonder what else he’s not factoring in, and how much of that is deliberate. To dismiss pointing out differences between promises and actions as “whining” is obnoxious and candidly, not an honest take.
Somebody’s got to point out when the emperor has no clothes, and our ideological leaders, of which he is one, shouldn’t be discouraging that.
As for Texas Gun Rights, which brought us the above-linked story, instead of dismissing them as “anti-Trump,” maybe we should talk with Brandon Hererra and Lt. Col. Allen West first.
And as long as I’m pointing out disagreements, as essential as “in common use” has proven to be in moving the ball this far, going forward it can and will be used to deny arms that are not. He’s had the opportunity to refute me and show me where I’m wrong, and truthfully, I wish he could.
As for criticisms earned by the Trump administration, and there are many in the mix, I keep coming back to how this could be easily avoided and we could live happily ever after singing his praises.
But not presuming to be “the smartest person in the room,” what the hell do I know?
[Via WiscoDave]
A SCOTUS pending cert petition in Viramontes v. Cook County needs the support of the Trump DOJ. [Watch]
Agreed.
How could they be told in a unified gun voter voice for greatest impact?
[Via Jess]
But most Americans today are more likely to associate the name with the left-leaning gun control organization than with the man himself. Is that really how we want to represent the pro-American, pro-Constitution Trump White House? [More]
Now watch the same @$$#0!e$ who demanded tearing down Confederate statues scream like stuck pigs when the plaque is taken down.
[Via Jess]
Why the Supreme Court Fight Over Nationwide Injunctions Matters for Gun Owners [More]
It figures the “our democracy” people want one of their apparatchik’s opinions to be binding over all of us, no matter what we think.
With “progressives,” every day is Opposite Day.
But this is NOT a major loss for 2A or gun rights. First, it is not a 2A case so it does matter at all to Heller/Bruen analysis. Second, SCOTUS clearly left open the door for Trump to repeal the Biden ATF regulations (or even rewrite them in a very favorable way for the “home-made gun” industry… [More]
Regardless of how it was presented, this definitely is an infringement on the right of the people to keep and bear arms. And the next administration can undo any rule change this one makes.
About two weeks ago, Ms. Oyer was put on a working group to restore gun rights to people convicted of crimes, she said. [More]
Four Boxes Diner explains the significance.
See, it’s not “prickly” at all, Mel.
Well, maybe for NRA President “Lautenberg Bob” Barr…
[Via Jess]
The entire Department of Justice is starting to file documents in courts basically saying, “Hey we want to put these fights involving the ATF on hold because we’re likely going to be reconsidering them and changing position in favor of the right to keep and be arms.” [Watch]
The federal government asked the Eleventh Circuit to postpone oral arguments in a lawsuit challenging the ATF pistol brace rule, saying that it needs time to review it pursuant to Trump’s Second Amendment executive order…
We’ll see…
[Via Jess]
WE CAN USE ANTI-GUN TRICKS AGAINST THE LEFT TO END BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP – Anti-gunners use “standing” arguments against the 2nd Amendment. Now it’s time for us to use them against the left. [Watch]
Yeah, do it, but I’d actually be more interested in overturning precedents that ruled the people have no stake in infringements.
[Via Jess]
The Gun Owners of America were denied in their efforts to collect a $400,000 attorney fee in their successful work in challenging ATF’s bumpstock case. [More]
When writing an update on my case, I made a mistake on the title of my piece that is misleading. The judge’s order, as the text of the article states, was that “the plaintiffs shall file any motion for attorney’s fees.”
I signed a declaration for that last week to allow for the attorneys to submit their claim. We’ll now see if the ATF/DOJ under Trump still intends to fight gun owners tooth and nail.
[Via Jess]
Federal Appeals Judge ATTACKS Ninth Circuit for Gaming 2nd Amendment Cases [Watch]
We talked about this butterfly knife/2A case here.
Judge Lawrence VanDyke sounds like a perfect SCOTUS replacement.
Sotomayor ain’t exactly looking peppy these days…
[Via Jess]
There is a case now being litigated in front of the United States Supreme Court brought by the same lawyers and organization that represented none other than Michael Cargill in the Cargill case dealing with the bumpstock, a big victory for the2 Second Amendment over the ATF there, but this case involves the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial but it’s just as important to win as many other cases involving the Supreme Court and the Constitution [Watch]
If we start applying the unambiguous language understood by the Founders the house of cards will collapse, and that scares the hell out of the controllers.
Also see NCLA Asks Supreme Court to Hear Case to Overturn “Petty-Offense Exception” to Jury-Trial Right.
[Via Jess]
Major 2A win in Ohio involving an individual indicted for possessing a firearm while under indictment for crime of which he was never convicted. [Watch]
If I’m reading this right, (Republican) prosecutor Melissa Powers evidently believes Ohioans elected a Republican majority so that she could deny the Second Amendment to a man whose robbery indictment was dismissed.
That’ll be useful to know if she ever seeks higher office.
[Via Jess]
INSANE: BIDEN DOJ MAKES CRAZY ARGUMENTS TO DEFEND POST OFFICE GUN BAN [Watch]
Among other things, like disinformation and actual fascism, we talked about the Statute of Northampton here.
Boy, that’s a lot of “Gun-Free Zones”! Now superimpose it over maps of schools, parks, government buildings, “sensitive areas”…
Welcome to the Land of the Second Amendment!
[Via Jess]
It reminds me of the DOJ snot who coined the term me ‘n the boys proudly embrace:
In short, there is a tangled web of connections between a small cadre of firearms activists and their efforts to recover fees through largely unsuccessful FOIA litigation.
Yeah, that’s why we do it.
It also brings up a suggestion I’ve been making of late:
Imagine now the Department of Justice under an actual Second Amendment advocate, and what it could do fighting infringements and prohibitionist lawfare waged by states with unlimited tax war chests in tandem with Astroturf prohibitionist groups funded by antigun elites. Right now, the costs to defend against these innumerable assaults on all levels are borne by gun rights groups and members of mostly modest means who can only support a fraction of what is needed. That equation could be turned on its head.
[Via Herschel]
The 2A Attorneys in Gray v. Jennings Delaware “assault weapon” ban litigation have filed a submission to SCOTUS as the three AR-15/Magazine ban cases continue their move through the Court’s consideration process. Mark Smith Four Boxes Diner discusses. [Watch]
That’s a counterpoint to this.
January sounds like the month we’ll learn either way if this and related cases will be considered/consolidated or punted again.
[Via Jess]
The petition for a writ of certiorari should be denied. [More]
The state that inflicted Joe Biden onto the political scene says banning semiautomatic rifles and magazines doesn’t infringe on the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
Mark W. Smith ties it in with related cases SCOTUS is considering. And I continue to be suspicious of relying on “common use.”
[Via Jess]
Accordingly, “Miller stood for the proposition ‘that the Second Amendment does not protect those weapons not typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes, such as 3 short-barreled shotguns’ [More]
That’s not what Miller said at all.
He’s not through with the clown act:
While a silencer may be a firearm accessory, it is not a “bearable arm” that is capable of casting a bullet.
Neither was my “machinegun,” or “high capacity” magazines, or braces, or 80% receivers, or…
And again, “common use” is proving to be a trap.
It’s way past time to pasture this senile old “Reagan Republican.“
[Via Jess]
It’s literally 99.9999 or something like that of the AR-15s in America will have no connection to a murder in any given year, in other words well over 99.9 % of the AR-15s in the United States will have no connection to criminality in the United States in any given year, so if you’re going to have the government ban the 99.99% of the AR-15s in the United States because of a few hundred bad apples misbehaving with AR-15s you have engaged in a violation of our constitutional rights known as the Heckler veto… [Watch]
Good points. It sounds like you could make a good case that of all the people who heard Donald Trump speak on Jan. 6, only a handful ignored his call to be peaceful and got rowdy to the point of striking out at others, and that shouldn’t abridge his First Amendment-protected rights.
As an aside, I know speaking is different thatn writing in terms of not being able to go back and edit remarks before they’re released, but I hope in the future he’s mindful to say “killed with” more and “killed by” less.
[Via Jess]
