Posts Tagged Law

Their “Solution” Is Always To Restrict Ownership and Increase Bans

From Reason.com:

By contrast, proposals to raise the minimum purchase age for long guns at least have something to do with the Buffalo and Uvalde attacks, since both shooters were 18 years old. But it is hard to see how that policy can be reconciled with the Second Amendment unless you assume that 18-to-20-year-olds, unlike older adults, do not have a constitutional right to keep and bear arms. Two federal appeals courts recently rejected that proposition, citing a long tradition of gun ownership by young adults.

, , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

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.” 

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

ATF Says Forced Reset Trigger Is A Machine Gun

From Ammoland:

Firearms Policy Coalition today issued the following statement regarding the ATF’s “Open Letter to All Federal Firearms Licensees” regarding its classification of some “forced-reset triggers” (FRTs) as “firearms” and “machineguns” as defined in the National Firearms Act (NFA) and Gun Control Act (GCA):

This latest effort by the ATF to punish and stoke fear among peaceable people who purchase protected-arms components specifically designed to comply with federal law is further proof of the agency’s abusive overreach of statutory and constitutional bounds and a manic desire to expand its dominion. Furthermore, by being purposefully vague in saying it “intends to take appropriate remedial action,” the ATF adds to the unscrupulous nature of this action leaving sellers and owners unsure if they’ll be subject to abuse.

, , , , , , ,

No Comments

LA Sheriff Stripped Of Powers Over Mandate Refusal

From Insider.com:

The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors decided on Tuesday to relieve Sheriff Alex Villanueva of the responsibility to enforce COVID-19 vaccine mandates, according to board documents viewed by Insider. The Los Angeles Times first reported the story.

The decision to strip him of the responsibility comes after Villanueva has for months refused to enforce the mandate. 

, , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Let Your Neighbors Defend Themselves

From Ammoland:

We’re acting as if our bad dreams were more real than the bodies with chalk marks around them. Part of that problem is political. Politicians appeal to our fantasies and we’re suckers for that. 

, , , , ,

No Comments

Passing A Law Doesn’t Mean People Will Obey

From Reason:

Media outlets love reporting the results of polling on hot-button policy issues, but they rarely tell you if the people supporting proposed legislation (especially when it’s restrictive) are the same people who would be affected by it. That matters in several important ways, not least of which is that getting a law passed is not the same thing as getting people to obey. Nowhere does that matter more than in the heated debate over gun laws.

, , , , , , ,

No Comments

Muslim Woman Sues Gun Range Over Safety Rules

From Bearing Arms:

Rania Barakat and her husband went to Frontier Justice on Jan. 1, 2020, to shoot at its gun range. According to the lawsuit, Barakat was told she would not be allowed to use the range unless she removed her hijab, a religious head covering worn by some Muslim women.

Frontier Justice officials said in a statement posted on Facebook that the dress code rules, which have been in place since the store opened in 2015, are designed to protect people from being burned by expended brass and are not discriminatory.

The gun range requires shooters to remove all head coverings except baseball caps facing forward. A store manager explained that shrapnel could cause the hijab and skin to burn.

, , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Judge Says ARs Are Not Firearms In Dissent

From US v. Burning Breast:

The relevant evidence in this case came from one ATF expert witness. His testimony was based on ATF records that traced one serialized part on Burning Breast’s gun: the lower receiver. [..] Given these facts, there are two ways the Government could get a conviction. First, it could have proven that the lower receiver found on Burning Breast’s gun is a “receiver,” and so a “firearm” as a matter of law. 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(3)(B). Thatwas what the ATF agent repeatedly told the jury, and that was the Government’s theory at trial. [..] There is just one problem: an AR-15’s lower receiver does not meet the Government’s own definition of a “receiver.”

To be a “receiver,” ATF regulations require the part to “provide housing for the hammer, bolt or breechblock, and firing mechanism.” [..] That means an AR-15 lower receiver is not a “firearm,” and the Government’s theory at trial was a non-starter.

, , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Judge Nixes Hawaii Gun Laws

From Ammoland:

The lawsuit centers around Hawaii’s requirements on gun owners along with Honolulu Police Department’s registration and gun policies. Gun owners must apply for a firearm permit in person at the central police station on Oahu. This rule means that a gun must travel to the police station in Honolulu to apply for a gun permit no matter where they live on the island. The resident must then return to the station in person 14 days later to pick up the permit. Once the person acquires a firearm, they must then again return to the station with the gun to register it with the police department.

, , , ,

No Comments

Gun Rights Groups File Amicus Briefs In NY Carry Case

From Ammoland:

Two national gun rights organizations—the Second Amendment Foundation and its grassroots sibling, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms—have filed separate amicus briefs to the U.S. Supreme Court in support of a challenge of New York State’s ultra-restrictive carry laws by the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association (NYSRPA)

, , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Attorney Discusses The Effect of Jan 6 On Gun Rights

From Ammoland:

Paloma’s new book is called, Events of January 6: What Impact the Second Amendment Movement? The Activist’s Workbook, and it releases on Independence Day. I had a chance to speak to Paloma about her new book and her views on the state of the Country.

, , , ,

No Comments

Time To Rectify Heller

From The Federalist:

Heller adopted the nonsense whole cloth. Ironically, the opinion was written by Justice Scalia, renowned as the court’s great originalist. Ironic, in that there is nothing in the legislative history of the Second Amendment to support a “common use” test.

As Judge Benitez wrote, “The command of the Amendment is that the right to keep and bear arms ‘shall not be infringed.’” Not some arms, but “Arms.” And not “infringed too much,” but “infringed” at all.

, , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Stop Using “Law Abiding Gun Owner”

From TheGunBlog.ca:

“To abide” is “to bear patiently,” “to endure without yielding,” or “to accept without objection,” according to the online Merriam-Webster dictionary.

Thesaurus.com suggests alternatives like “to submit, “to put up with,” “to receive,” “to take,” “to stomach,” “to swallow.”

Abiding is about compliance, obedience, and subservience. It’s submitting out of obligation instead of acting powerfully from choice.

, , , , , ,

No Comments

Analysis Of The California Gun Ruling

From The Federalist:

Under the Heller test, this record establishes the unconstitutionality of the ban on assault weapons, Benitez concluded. However, being bound by Ninth Circuit precedent, Benitez continued to consider the constitutionality of California’s law under that appellate court’s two-prong test. In his analysis, Benitez bypassed the strict scrutiny standard, noting in passing the law would fail that test as well, to apply the “intermediate scrutiny standard” created by the Ninth Circuit.

, , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

SCOTUS Case More Than About Right To Carry

From Cam and Company:

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments