Tag: Second Amendment Foundation

Desensitizing

The specific additional “sensitive places” designations that are challenged in the amended lawsuit include parks, beaches, recreational facilities or playgrounds or areas owned or controlled by a state, county or local government unit, plus youth sports events, an airport or public transportation hub, and various health care facilities. These areas were designated “sensitive” because the New Jersey Legislature was determined to “continue minimizing the carry of handguns as much as possible,” the lawsuit notes. [More]

Honestly, who ever heard of anyone being attacked in any of those places?

An Age Old Question

The Second Amendment Foundation and its partners in a federal case challenging the federal prohibition on handgun sales to young adults ages 18-20, has filed a reply brief supporting their motion for summary judgment in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia. [More]

And the same Democrats who say they want them unarmed because they’re too immature are counting on 16-year-olds to vote for them.

Punching Back

SAF FILES FEDERAL LAWSUIT AGAINST ILLINOIS GUN BAN [More]

Look at all the legal actions, just for this group.

You’d better believe part of the enemy’s legal strategy is to use their virtually unlimited tax plunder resources to deplete their victims’ resources.

I’d really like to see a concerted effort by the “gun lobby” to go after qualified immunity for enforcers abetting tyranny.

Just Like the Founders Intended

Attorneys for the Second Amendment Foundation and its allies have filed a brief supporting their earlier motion for summary judgment in a federal challenge of Illinois’ ban on concealed carry by young adults in a case known as Meyer v. Raoul. [More]

Remember all those laws from the Founding era making it a crime for 18-20-year-olds to have a gun?

Me neither.

Muster Call

A federal lawsuit supported by the Second Amendment Foundation and Firearms Policy Coalition has been filed in New York, challenging that state’s ban on so-called “assault weapons.” [More]

I’ve been arguing not to forget “core purpose” in 2A actions, so I find this a good add:

The firearms at issue in this case are the sorts of bearable arms in common use for lawful purposes that law-abiding people possess at home by the millions. And they are, moreover, exactly what they would bring to service in militia duty, should such be necessary.

Title Case

“Property owners indeed have the right to exclude. But the state may not unilaterally exercise that right and, thereby, interfere with the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens who seek to carry for self-defense outside of their own homes.” [More]

If you don’t want me there, put up a sign. It’s not the government’s job to absolve you of accountability, and I’ll be happy to let you be the attractant.

UPDATE

Attorney Mark W. Smith calls this “major.” [Watch]

[Via Jess]

Also from SAF

SAF FILES BRIEF SUPPORTING MOTION FOR INJUNCTION AGAINST DELAWARE HB 450

A Common Factor

The Second Amendment Foundation today filed a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Delaware’s recently-adopted ban on so-called “assault weapons” on the grounds the legislation—known as House Bill 450—violates the Second Amendment. [More]

Show me a “commonsense gun safety” bill that doesn’t.

What’s in a Word?

SAF FILES MOTION TO INTERVENE IN CHALLENGE OF NEW GOV’T. ‘FIREARM’ DEFINITION [More]

I posted the release in its entirety on my WOG Placeholder blog because I didn’t see it appearing on the SAF News page yet, and if I don’t address this now I’ll never get back to it– check there for all case announcements to see how many actions they’re involved in and what they’re doing.

Predator Empowerment Zones Disputed

The Second Amendment Foundation today filed suit in federal court challenging the new concealed carry statute in New York State that, among other things, prohibits concealed carry in churches. [More]

The Democrat authors of that legislation evidently didn’t feel six seconds gave murderous attackers enough of an advantage.

UPDATE

And here’s another case:

The Second Amendment Foundation scored a victory in a ruling by a Tennessee Appeals Court panel striking down a gun ban by a public housing authority in the community of Columbia on the grounds it violates the Second Amendment, citing recent Supreme Court language in the case of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen.

Every Terrible Implement

CONNECTICUT CITIZENS DEFENSE LEAGUE AND SECOND AMENDMENT FOUNDATION SUE CT OVER BAN ON MODERN SPORTING ARMS [More]

I dunno– “in Common Use for Lawful Purposes Throughout the United States” seems to exclude everything that’s not, including what will be developed in the future.

As noted:

The Supreme Court, in its infamous Miller decision, nonetheless recognized the function of the Militia, defined as “all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense [and] bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time,” was — and still is — to field citizen soldiers. These citizens bore arms that were suitable for that purpose, “ordinary military equipment” intended to be taken into “common defense” battles. The Militia did not assemble on the green bearing clubs and spears. They came with the intent to match and best a professional military threat. A modern Militia would require citizens to keep and bear exactly what the gun-grabbing politicians are trying to take away from them, what they pejoratively denounce as “weapons of war.”

And as noted:

Second Amendment will be Nullified if ‘Common Use’ is Restricted to ‘Popularity’

Old Enough to Serve

The Second Amendment Foundation today filed a complaint in U.S. District Court in West Virginia, challenging the federal prohibition on handgun sales to young adults ages 18-20, and is asking for a declaratory judgment and injunctive relief. [More]

I’ve made my views known…

UPDATE

And here’s another SAF legal action:

SAF SUES CALIFORNIA OVER LAW SUPPRESSING GUN LAWSUITS

Hey, why should people who don’t respect the Second Amendment respect the First?

A Public/Private Partnership

The Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project (SAF/IJP) has filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the White House, seeking copies of documents, both digital and print, “that show interactions between White House staff and members of gun control and gun safety groups.” [More]

It won’t be the first time we’ve seen leftists colluding with the government…

I haven’t seen the FOIA request itself, so don’t know how they plan on working around this:

By its terms, the FOIA applies to “the Executive Office of the President,” 5 U.S.C. § 552(f), but this term does not include either “the President’s immediate personal staff” or any part of the Executive Office of the President “whose sole function is to advise and assist the President.” Meyer v. Bush, 981 F.2d 1288, 1291 n.1 (D.C. Cir. 1993) (quoting H.R. Rep. No. 1380, 93d Cong., 2d Sess. 14 (1974)); see also, e.g., Soucie v. David, 448 F.2d 1067, 1075 (D.C. Cir. 1971). This means, among other things, that the parts of the Executive Office of the President that are known as the “White House Office” are not subject to the FOIA; certain other parts of the Executive Office of the President are.

Rope-a-Dope

The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and Defense Distributed have teamed up to sue the State of California over its ban on CNC machines used for producing unserialized firearms and a law letting the State recover attorney fees from plaintiffs and their lawyers. [More]

You get the feeling that the state, with virtually unlimited resources, is forcing the gun groups to expend all of theirs on lawsuit after lawsuit, counting on exhausting and wearing them out until they’ve got nothing left to punch with.

[Via Jess]

Verified by MonsterInsights