U.S. v. Morgan - The War on Guns

[T]he 10th Circuit Court of Appeals has found that machine guns are not protected under the Second Amendment with really a terribly reasoned ruling. But the outcome is the one we want because, as I’ve explained to you before, unequivocally, 100% we 1,000% do not want a machine gun case to go to the United States Supreme Court. Anyone that disagrees with me is 1,000% wrong. If a machine gun case goes to the Supreme Court, we will 1,000% lose, which will create more bad Second Amendment precedent. And it will also delay, as an opportunity cost the decision that AR-15s and semi-automatic rifles are protected arms under the Second Amendment… [Watch]

The fact that his legal read on this is correct should be all the proof we need that the court benches are dominated by traitors.

[Via Jess]

The Morgan case is a case where a federal judge in Kansas found that machine gun possession charges are unconstitutional in violation of the Second Amendment as it applied to this individual Mr Morgan. This Kansas Morgan decision is now being contested by the Trump administration in the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals. In fact, the Trump DOJ just argued to the 10th Circuit that the decision down below should be reversed. They argue that machine guns are not in common use for lawful purposes in today’s society and that they are dangerous and unusual items and as dangerous and unusual items they can be restricted by the federal government essentially however they want. [Watch]

I hate to say I told you so.

The “trap” is “common use.

And “pro-gun” lawyers — the ones coming up with all kinds of apologetic rationales for administration betrayals, helped set it.

HOW THINGS WORK AROUND HERE

Satisfaction Guaranteed

Anyone not happy with anything on this site at any time will get 100% of all money they paid to me refunded, no questions asked. (No gratuities solicited or accepted.)

Comment House Rules

Keep them on topic. Trying to hijack threads really grinds my gears. No spam.
I moderate them so I’ll get to them when I can.
No threats against anyone except me. No fights–this is my place and if things get ugly, I treat unruly visitors the same way as I would in my home. Do not feed trolls–I’ll take out the trash.
Try to keep it clean.
I’m the final arbiter. If you don’t like the rules, start your own damn blog.

WarOnGuns Correspondents

Story tips received via email and social media messages will be credited. Just let me know how you want to be recognized (real name, first name/last initial, or screen name.)

Link Policy

I maintained a WogRoll at the old Blogspot place predicated on reciprocity with like-minded RKBA-related sites. Truth be told, I never got much in terms of site visits to make the effort worth the time. I may try to do something again in the future, but for now, my hands are more than full trying to get a new site started.

Advertising Disclosure

This is a placeholder for now because I have not done ads on the old blog for years. In case I ever start them up here, this will be the policy in effect: The FTC has some fool nonsense rules about ads on blogs or some such and presumes authority over the First Amendment to compel the unfunded mandate that we who earn ad revenues make some kind of disclosure so you don’t think we’re getting paid to say nice things about people or God knows what, meaning they must think you’re stupid, too. I have had a few ads on the old site in the past and may do so again if I think it’s worth a try. Combined, I probably couldn’t buy a box of good cigars each year, let alone a bottle of George T. Stagg, and that is somehow supposed to compromise my morality to force me to say nice things about products and services I don’t mean simply in exchange for filthy lucre. If you believe that, leave now–you’re not smart enough to be here. Bottom line, aside from welcoming a sponsor, I will do no posts related to their products or services, or reviews of what they offer without complete disclosure.

About “The Only Ones”

So named from a comment by DEA agent Lee Paige, who told a classroom full of kids he was “the only one” qualified to be armed and then promptly shot himself in the foot, the purpose of this feature has never been to bash cops. The only reason I do this is to amass a credible body of evidence to present when those who would deny our right to keep and bear arms use the argument that only government enforcers are professional and trained enough to do so safely and responsibly. And it’s also used to illustrate when those of official status, rank, or privilege, both in law enforcement and in some other government position, get special breaks not available to we commoners, particularly (but not exclusively) when they’re involved in gun-related incidents.

Tag: U.S. v. Morgan

‘Very Good News’?

Shall Not Be Infringed UNLESS…