Category Archives: gun control

Auto Key Card: Motion to Dismiss

Here’s another important Second Amendment case to watch.

The case is US v. Matthew Raymond Hoover. Hoover was arrested and charged with an NFA violation; specifically that he was selling Auto Key Cards, pictures of parts that could be assembled into a “lightning link,” and subsequently installed in an AR-pattern rifle converting it into a machinegun. Others have been similarly charged for selling pictures.

Every news outlet that included pictures of the Auto Key Card in their reports should also be watching this case.

Hoover has moved to dismiss the charges in light of NYSRPA v. Bruen.

“[W]hen the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct. The Government must then justify its regulation by demonstrating that it is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearms regulation. Only then may a court conclude that the individual’s conduct falls outside the Second Amendment’s ‘unqualified command.'”

Having explained the reasoning of NYSRPA v. Bruen to the court, they demonstrate the applicability to this case.

Further, the TAF’s decision that the tchothke at issue — a stainless steel card with some lines lightly thereupon engraved — was a machinegun came completely by administrative fiat, absent even notice and comment. Our Nation’s history and tradition does not, and cannot, support a finding that an alleged drawingof a part is that part merely because an elected bureaucrat unilaterally willed it to be.

I was just discussing this morning the fact that the NFA of 1934 was completely unprecedented in prior legislation. Because the applicability of NYSRPA v. Bruen to the NFA is extremely obvious.

However, since they mentioned an “elected bureaucrat unilaterally” usurping Congress to make their own “laws,” I would also have cited West Virginia v. EPA, in which the Supreme Court slapped down the EPA for doing exactly that.

I can’t see an honest court upholding these charges in view of NYSRPA v. Bruen. But we have a major problem with American courts, in that respect. So I won’t be terribly surprised if this ends up going to SCOTUS eventually. For a change, and elimination of federal bureaucratic power and abuse, as dramatic as tossing the NFA, this pretty much has to go the the Supremes.

Added: I almost missed it, but this is one of the Firearms Policy Coalition‘s cases. It’s another example of why I’ve long believed they deserve the support of those believe in the Second Amendment.

 

Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses.
Click here to donate via PayPal.

(More Tip Jar Options)
Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Ghost Gun In The News

I’m sure this will result in calls for commonsense plumbing control.

Former Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has been assassinated. And the assassin used an evil “ghost gun.”

The assassin of Shinzo Abe has been identified as 41-year-old Yamagami Tetsuya, who used a homemade black powder shotgun.

No Ghost Gunner CNC mill.

No 3D-printer.

No unfinished receiver.

No “parts kit.”

No ammunition to register and regulate.

From that picture and description, it looks like some pipes, a board, and a lot of electrical tape. They specify “black powder,” so I imagine the assassin made that, too. No word on the projectiles, but I don’t think he’d have had much trouble finding ball bearings or other round shot.

Japan has some of the most restrictive gun control laws in the world, and it still could not stop a killer with 1950s homebrew technology.

So what will the victim-disarmers try now? NFA tax stamps for plumbing and electrical supplies?

A ban on charcoal?

Well, they’d probably like that last one. Of course, to enforce it, it you’d need to ban trees and combustion.

To regulate the nitrates, they’d have to ban urination. Tricky, that.

Sulfur is a bit tougher unless you live near a sulfur spring; but there’s always drywall for the chemically-inclined.

The rights-haters would need to ban technology that’s been around for more than a thousand years. That should work well.

Then they’s have to figure out what to do about bows.

Will, meet way.
— D. Dietz

 

Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses.
Click here to donate via PayPal.

(More Tip Jar Options)
Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Gun Criminals For Gun Control

Funny how violent criminals always like gun control.

Reagan Shooter John Hinckley: ‘There’s too Many Guns in America’
In the wake of recent mass shootings in the country, such as Highland Park, Hinckley thrust his support behind background checks and waiting periods for those wanting to purchase a gun.

“I certainly don’t think the mentally ill should have access to guns. I mean, that’s kind of obvious,” Hinckley advised. “Background checks are good, and waiting periods are good. I think there [are] too many guns in America.”

DC’s highly restrictive gun laws — a complete handgun ban at the time, if I recall correctly — didn’t stop you.

“Nightline” co-anchor Juju Chang responded, “And coming from you, that’s quite a statement.

Yes, it is. A crazy, murderous criminal wants us disarmed. I wonder why that would be.

 

Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses.
Click here to donate via PayPal.

(More Tip Jar Options)
Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

SCOTUS Remands Remaining Second Amendment Cases

Today’s orders list is out. The Supreme Court granted certiorari for several 2A cases, vacated them, and remanded them back to the Circuit courts “further consideration in light of New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc. v. Bruen, 597 U. S. ___ (2022).”

Excellent! This is definitely the Court putting the Circuits on notice that they darned well better treat the Second as a fundamental constitutional right not subject to “compelling government interest” means testing. And we mean it this time!

 

Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses.
Click here to donate via PayPal.

(More Tip Jar Options)
Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Reining In Bureaucrats

Yesterday, I wrote about West Virgina v. EPA, a case challenging the ability of EPA bureaucrats to write “law.” If the states won, the precedent would be great news for those challenging the ATF’s propensity for pretending to be Congress.

We won. In a 6-3 opinion, Roberts wrote:

Congress did not grant EPA in Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act the authority to devise emissions caps based on the generation shifting approach the Agency took in the Clean Power Plan.
[…]
This is a major questions case. EPA claimed to discover an unheralded power representing a transformative expansion of its regulatory authority in the vague language of a long-extant, but rarely used, statute designed as a gap filler.
[…]
Given that precedent counsels skepticism toward EPA’s claim that Section 111 empowers it to devise carbon emissions caps based on a generation shifting approach, the Government must point to “clear congressional authorization” to regulate in that manner.
[…]
But the only question before the Court is more narrow: whether the “best system of emission reduction” identified by EPA in the Clean Power Plan was within the authority granted to the Agency in Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act. For the reasons given, the answer is no.

The bump-fire stock ban, with its redefinition of “manual operation of the trigger comes immediately to mind.

 

Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses.
Click here to donate via PayPal.

(More Tip Jar Options)
Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

For Life, Sometimes; For US

But not for thee, says the Vatican. The Vatican News ran a column on the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health ruling, but they couldn’t leave it at that.

For life, always
Being for life, always, also means defending it against the threat of firearms, which unfortunately have become a leading cause of death of children and adolescents in the US.

We can hope, therefore, that the debate on the US Supreme Court ruling will not be reduced to an ideological confrontation, but will prompt all of us—on both sides of the ocean—to reflect on what it means to welcome life, to defend it, and to promote it with appropriate legislation.

And the Vatican will show us the way by taking away the Swiss Guard‘s halberds and SG-550 full-auto assault rifles, and equipping them with powder puffs and super-soakers?

You know what didn’t happen yesterday? 100+ million American gun owners with some 400 million firearms did not murder anyone. But based on CDC data on defensive gun use, 4,000 people probably defended themselves and others using firearms.

How many of those thousands might be dead if their defensive tools were taken away through “appropriate legislation“? Most of us lack the pope’s 24/7 heavily armed security or the option of armored transportation; nor even massive defensive walls, from behind which to lecture others on open borders.

We would prefer to have the ability to defend ourselves and families because we still think we have something to lose.

Perhaps instead of focusing on the inanimate implement, the Vatican should consider what sets the comparatively few murderers apart from the tens of millions of honest, peaceable gun owners who do not murder.

 

Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses.
Click here to donate via PayPal.

(More Tip Jar Options)
Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

246 Years Of Slippery Slope Make A Great Power Source

Here’s a post from my personal blog. I wanted to share it with TZP readers. Imagine trying to explain GCA ’68, Brady Bill, Lautenberg Amendment, and the past week’s 2A shenanigans to James Madison.

246 Years Of Slippery Slope Make A Great Power Source
[…]
Have you ever been trolled and harassed on social media by some girl you dated? She’s a domestic violence offender. Twitter trolling is annoying, but it hardly seems worth depriving someone of her fundamental, constitutional, individual rights for life. Just block her.

Imagine James Madison hearing about what we’ve done to the Bill of Rights in the 21st century.

“You deprive citizens of their g-d-given right to arms for mean letters?”
[…]

 

Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses.
Click here to donate via PayPal.

(More Tip Jar Options)
Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Return of the Vichy NRA?

It’s not as if it ever went away.

The NRA “compromised” to saddle us with the National Firearms Act (taxing and registering wide classes of firearms).

The NRA “compromised” to saddle us with the Gun Control Act prohibited persons, loss of mail order, and more).

The NRA “compromised” to saddle us with the Firearm Owners Protection Act (loss of new NFA items).

The NRA “compromised” to saddle us with NICS (preemptively prove your innocence).

The NRA “compromised” to saddle us with a bureaucratic bump stock ban.

Along the way, the NRA also fought against constitutional carry, and helped write “assault weapon” bans.

Also along the way, the NRA turned around to fund raise to “fight against” those infringements its “compromises” created.

It appears we can add another “compromise” to the list.

NRA asked for mental health funding, school hardening money and 10-year sunset on juvenile records in background check system, per this document.

We can expect an NRA announcement that it will fight this new collection of infringements in 3… 2…

Oops.

BREAKING: NRA Announces Opposition to Senate Gun Control Legislation

“This legislation can be abused to restrict lawful gun purchases, infringe upon the rights of law-abiding Americans, & use fed dollars to fund gun control measures being adopted by state & local politicians.”

I expect NRA “gimme money” mailings to hit my mail box any second now.

Oh, yes. And there’s this.

The NRA won that case? That’s a surprise to me. I do not see them as a party in the case. It did file an amicus brief. But parties to suits don’t have to file amicus briefs.

Kinda reminds of how the NRA tried to claim credit for HELLER, after trying to kill the case they feared would be lost if it went to SCOTUS.

 

Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses.
Click here to donate via PayPal.

(More Tip Jar Options)
Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Never Before?

President Dementia is unhappy about Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health which overturned the always dubious mental gymnastics of Roe v. Wade and Casey.

But don’t worry. I’m not co-opting TZP for the abortion issue.

President Joe Biden made remarks on Friday in the wake of the release of a Supreme Court ruling overturning Roe v. Wade, and sending the decision-making capabilities on abortion legality back to the states. Biden, a Catholic, is squarely on the side of abortion being a right enshrined in the Constitution. The Supreme Court said unequivocally on Friday that it was not, and that ruling is clearly stated.

Suck it up, buttercup. But this…

He said that “the court has done what they have never done before, expressly take away a constitutional right that is so fundamental, so many Americans have already been recognized.”

Never before? I beg to differ. Gun owners have become accustomed to being stripped of a constitutional right by the Supreme Court since 1939. A right that, unlike abortion, is actually specifically listed in the Constitution.

Welcome to the party, pal.

After decades of infringements that Gropin’ Joe dementedly forgets, we gun owners are thrilled to see the Supreme Court finally noticing, in the frickin’ 21st century, that, Oh, yeah; the right to keep and bear arms is in there.

Biden said that his administration is unable to ensure abortion access via executive order, but that he would advocate for women to be able to legally cross state lines to access abortion, which is not illegal anyway.

Unable? That’s not what he — and his Department of Just-Us — said about the NYSRPA v Bruen ruling, promising to ignore SCOTUS and help states continue the violate the Constitutional Second Amendment and Supreme Court precedent.

In fact, I expect the Xiden administration to do the same thing on abortion as they say they’ll do with the 2A. And he’ll have lots of Dim support, like Ocassionally-firing-Cortex.

“This decision: illegitimate,” Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez yelled into a megaphone an activist was holding.

“Into the streets,” AOC chanted repeatedly outside the High Court, according to video captured by Hernandez.

If the Supreme Court is illegitimate, I hope someone more self aware, and with a higher IQ, will remind them just what sort of appellate process they’re leaving us to.

 

Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills, site hosting and SSL certificate, new 2021 model hip, and general life expenses.
Click here to donate via PayPal.

(More Tip Jar Options)
Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

NEW YORK STATE RIFLE & PISTOL ASSOCIATION v. BRUEN

The long anticipated Supreme Court decision on New York’s insanely restrictive “good cause” requirements for a concealed carry license has tossed the state requirements, in favor of NYSRPA. For those interested only in this single case, here is the meat of the decision:

New York’s proper-cause requirement violates the Fourteenth Amendment in that it prevents law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their right to keep and bear arms. We therefore reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remand the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

I had feared that, even if they ruled in favor of NYSRPA, it would be a very narrow ruling; touching only on “show good cause” may-issue licensing. But the respondents — Bruen et al screwed up by stupidly presenting what they thought would historical precedents supporting their licensing system. This gave the Court a chance to make strong statements on a number of 2A-related things.

So “proceedings consistent with this opinion” are going to be very, very interesting. Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the opinion; when I saw that, I knew it was going to good. He goes into history in surprising detail. This opinion could be used as an American history textbook for a complete school year. Homeschoolers take note.

Continue reading NEW YORK STATE RIFLE & PISTOL ASSOCIATION v. BRUEN

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail