- Comms
- Law
- Medic
- News
- Opinion
- Threat Watch
- Training
- Warrior Tools
- Accessories
- Ammo
- Body Armor
- Books
- Clothing
- Commo
- Gear
- Handguns
- Holsters
- Knives
- Long Guns
- ACC
- Accuracy International
- Barrett
- Benelli
- Beretta
- Blaser
- Bushmaster
- Custom
- CZ
- Desert Tactical Arms
- DPMS
- FN
- Forums
- HK
- IWI
- Kel-Tec Long Guns
- LaRue
- LWRC
- McMillan
- Mosin Nagant
- Mossberg
- Para
- Remington
- Rock River Arms
- Ruger Long Guns
- Sabre Defense
- Sako
- SIG Sauer
- SKS
- Smith & Wesson Long Guns
- Springfield
- Styer
- Weatherby
- Wilson Combat
- Winchester
- Magazines
- Maintenance
- Navigation
- Optics
- Sights
- Tech
- Warriors
Posts Tagged civil rights
Wisconsin Supreme Court Affirms Right To Carry For Misdemeanor Convictions
From Bearing Arms:
Any form of political unanimity is rare these days, and especially so when we’re talking about guns. But in a 7-0 ruling today, the Wisconsin State Supreme Court struck down a provision in state law that barred all those convicted of the misdemeanor crime of disorderly conduct from obtaining a concealed carry license.
Ukraine Understands The Need For Armed Civilians
From The Gazette:
Zablotsky tells me Ukrainians are overwhelmingly in favor of the right of individuals to keep and bear arms. Ukrainians are now allowed to make private gun purchases. Territorial defense units were formed by local communities and were handed out arms by the military.
Zablotsky is steering a movement to procure guns for Ukrainian civilians to make his country a safer place. They believe that every Ukrainian owning a firearm, and trained how to use it, is the best form of protection from any foreign invasion.
Gun Control Groups Complain That Gun Owners’ Privacy Is Hampering Violence Studies
From Ammoland:
The Los Angeles Times is reporting that lawsuits filed by the National Rifle Association, Second Amendment Foundation and “other gun rights groups” challenging California’s sharing of admittedly “detailed information on gun owners” with researchers is hampering so-called “gun violence studies.”
San Jose “Bans” Unserialized Guns
From Bearing Arms:
Nor will it do anything about the surge of future unserialized firearms that will be made.
See, the problem here is that Liccardo and others seem to think that if you legislate against these things, the criminals just won’t be able to get them.
Maybe I’m wrong, but I don’t seem to remember criminals having too much trouble getting firearms before unserialized firearms were much of a thing.
California Bans More Pistols
From The Reload:
“On May 6, 2022, the Heckler & Koch USP9 V1, USP40 V1, Compact USP45 V1, Compact USP40 V1, USP 40 Expert V9, USP 45 Expert V1, USP40C-LEM, USP Compact 9 Stainless V1, USP Compact 45 Stainless V1, USP Compact 40 Stainless V1, and USP 45 Elite handguns were removed from the Roster of Certified Handguns pursuant to California Code of Regulations, title 11, section 4070(c),” a California DOJ bulletin disseminated to licensed gun dealers in the state reads. “Any further questions should be directed to Heckler & Koch.”
Ride Share Companies’ Policies Making Drivers Targets Of Crime
From Bearing Arms:
That’s somewhat of an evergreen headline, since this isn’t exactly a new phenomenon, nor are the company’s policies requiring their drivers to be disarmed while on the clock. Violate that policy and you’ll be fired, even if you used your gun in self-defense.
Ukrainian Politician Wants To Expand Gun Rights
From The Washington Times:
Months before the Russian invasion, Mr. Zablotskyy took on his country’s civilian gun-control system that was inherited from the former Soviet Union when he introduced a bill to allow private ownership of firearms.
“I tried to convince parliament. I was the sponsor of the bill that allowed the ownership of private firearms within Ukraine. Unfortunately, that bill has failed. And, largely, of course, due to the Russian lobby,” he told The Washington Times. “Now we, of course, understand why. I think that now there’s overwhelming support for the right of Ukrainians to bear arms.”
Dems Want Harsher Penalties For Guns Found By TSA
From Bearing Arms:
The letter specifically highlighted how Mr Cawthorn, the embattled North Carolina Congressman, was recently cited for carrying a 9mm gun at Charlotte-Douglas Airport, as WSOC9 reported. This was the second time Mr Cawthorn was caught with a gun at an airport, since he tried to bring a gun on his carry-on luggage at Asheville’s regional airport.
“Two incidents in such a short period of time should raise our collective alarm regarding repeat offenses involving a firearm. Accordingly, we urge the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) to act decisively to ensure repeat offenders like Rep. Cawthorn face the full extent of TSA’s enforcement actions,” Mr Thompson and Ms Coleman wrote in a letter.
Academic Law Paper on the Essentialness of the Second Amendment
From Josh Blackman:
Constitutional litigation over the Second Amendment has followed a familiar pattern. In the decade since Heller and McDonald, countless cases have turned on a foundational question: how much danger does the weapon pose? But in 2020, the courts were suddenly presented with a novel constitutional question: how much danger does obtaining the weapon pose? During the COVID-19 pandemic, state and local governments enacted complete prohibitions on the acquisition of firearms. Willing buyers were ready to comply with all extant gun-control regulations. But these governments shuttered firearm stores completely. These policies were adopted not to stop the sale of guns but to stop the spread of the novel coronavirus. In short order, these governments deemed the Second Amendment as “non-essential.”
The Shifting Demographics Of Gun Owners
From Axios:
That more people of color are exercising their Second Amendment rights could spell trouble for Democrats, who already suffered losses among these demographics in key battleground states in 2020.
Culture Promotes Freedom, Not Laws Or Judges
From Open Source Defense:
It’s easy to point to moments where the Supreme Court spectacularly discarded people’s rights — Plessy v. Ferguson, Buck v. Bell, Wickard v. Filburn, Korematsu v. U.S., etc. etc. — as the thing that allowed a terrible chain of events. But did they allow the events, or were they caused by those same events? In the case of, say, Korematsu, you had a country that was willing to force everyone on the west coast with Japanese ancestry into camps. Would that country have been stopped by a Supreme Court that in the midst of it all piped up to say, “Hey everyone, you can’t imprison people for being Japanese, ok?” And more to the point, would such an environment produce a Supreme Court that would say that?