A young man in Minnesota is facing a September trial for the unlawful possession of two firearms without serial numbers. The problem with the charges is that the firearms in question were home builds; private manufacture, not commercial.
The County Attorney and law enforcement have charged Walker with violating MN 609.667 because his privately made firearms do not have serial numbers on them – despite not being required under federal law – and, in our opinion, not needed under Minnesota statutes.
Whoever commits any of the following acts may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than five years or to payment of a fine of not more than $10,000, or both:
(3) receives or possesses a firearm that is not identified by a serial number.
…but, it not quite.
As used in this section, “serial number or other identification” means the serial number and other information required under United States Code, title 26, section 5842, for the identification of firearms.
Each manufacturer and importer and anyone making a firearm shall identify each firearm, other than a destructive device, manufactured, imported, or made by a serial number which may not be readily removed, obliterated, or altered, the name of the manufacturer, importer, or maker, and such other identification as the Secretary may by regulations prescribe.
If you’re an idiot Sherbourne County deputy, county attorney, or judge mostly unfamiliar with federal law, that probably seems clear. They forgot to look at the chapter definitions, described in 26 USC 5845.
(a)Firearm
The term “firearm” means (1) a shotgun having a barrel or barrels of less than 18 inches in length; (2) a weapon made from a shotgun if such weapon as modified has an overall length of less than 26 inches or a barrel or barrels of less than 18 inches in length; (3) a rifle having a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length; (4) a weapon made from a rifle if such weapon as modified has an overall length of less than 26 inches or a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length; (5) any other weapon, as defined in subsection (e); (6) a machinegun; (7) any silencer (as defined in section 921 of title 18, United States Code); and (8) a destructive device. The term “firearm” shall not include an antique firearm or any device (other than a machinegun or destructive device) which, although designed as a weapon, the Secretary finds by reason of the date of its manufacture, value, design, and other characteristics is primarily a collector’s item and is not likely to be used as a weapon.
That chapter is talking about commercial manufacture and NFA firearms. Unless Walker‘s firearms are short-barrel rifles, or other NFA item, federal law does not require serial numbers. The firearms in question appear to be an AR-pattern 9mm pistol and an AR-10 with a 20 inch barrel. Not NFA.
My guess is that — unless someone hits the County Attorney with a clue bat, Walker will initially be convicted, the courts being what they are these days.
He should win on eventual appeal; though Ghu only knows how high the appeals will have to go. It’s going to be expensive, so if you can, you might contribute a little something to his GiveSendGo legal fund.
And once Walker’s record is cleared, he needs to sue the ever-loving s–t out of the idiot deputies and the County Attorney. None of them can claim good faith ignorance of the law since…
Walker informed the deputy of the federal laws around PMFs and not requiring a serial number if for personal use. And since he is a lawful gun owner, no restrictions on owning them. The deputies detained Walker for several hours, and confiscated his firearms.
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. Gab Pay link
(More Tip Jar Options)
Yesterday, June 6, 2023, federal judge Robert J. Bryan issued a ruling denying a preliminary injunction against Washington’s “assault weapon” ban. In my not so humble opinion, this proves that it is high time for the elderly –88 years old — Bryan to retire.
Reading his decision, a couple of points jumped out at me. I’ll begin with one that would almost be funny if the topic, victim disarmament, weren’t so serious.
Semiautomatic assault weapons represent a significant technological change – they allow a shooter to fire as fast as they can pull the trigger, unlike previous guns.
Possibly the mentally challenged judge meant that such arms can be fired repeatedly “as fast as they can pull the trigger.” But specificity in law matters; we’ll take him at his specific written word, and note that any firearm, since the medieval hand cannons fired by setting a light to the touch hole, can be fired simply by pulling the trigger.
Allowing that maybe in his dotage he did mean rapid repeat fire…
Paging Jerry Miculek!. Eight rounds on target. In one second. With a revolver, not a semiautomatic firearm.
Moving on to the very next sentence:
While semiautomatic weapons like the AR-15 were invented in the 1950s, the growth in ownership of semiautomatic assault weapons proliferated in the late 2000s.
Bryan, please note those were in the 19th century. We’re currently in the 21st century, and the basic idea of semiautomatic firearms is hardly innovative anymore.
That part was merely morbidly amusing (if you have my sort of twisted sense of humor). Bryan’s explanation of why Washington’s ban does not run afoul of the Supreme Court’s Bruen ruling (which requires to be constitutional, a gun control law must be based in a general historical tradition) is scary. “General” meaning that isolated local laws don’t count; and “historical” meaning somewhere in the chronological neighborhood of the passage of the Second Amendment or earlier.
For an example of an applicable law, he cites local laws against carrying — not a ban on ownership — of Bowie knives not even invented until decades after the proper historical time frame. Bryan is clearly losing it.
Nay, completely lost it. Because he also cites…. Well, in his own words:
[C]omplete bans on the possession of certain weapons (as opposed to laws forbidding the carrying of those weapons) did not occur as much in our early Nation’s history because the federal and state governments did not have the “maturity, powers, tools, or resources” to implement and enforce a complete ban.
Yes, he cited nonexistent laws which he supposes would have been passed and enforced, if only the poor government had the sheer raw power to get away with it. In his mind, it seems that constitutional authority derives from tyrannical, police state force not the ratified agreed-to words of the actual document.
And I guess he figures that Washington has accumulated sufficient power now, so it’s all good.
We’ll see. If constitutional authority now comes down to who has the most guns and accurate targeting, and not the legal language of the Constitution and courts, Bryan may be putting himself out of work, retirement or no. After all, mightn’t some people decide that if might makes right, is on the side of the heaviest artillery; why not skip wasting money on court challenges and go straight to Bryan’s preferred test-by- fire-power?
This ruling was so bizarre that I wondered if his… thinking was reflected in other cases he’s heard. The very first case I found in a quick search was Tingley v. Equal Rights Washington, in which a therapist was challenging the state’s ban on “conversion therapy. Bryan ruled against Tingley.
Regardless of your personal take on “convesrion therapy” (“curing” people of homosexuality), Bryan’s rationale in this should also raise questions about his mental competence.
The prohibited conduct at issue here, performing conversion therapy, is analogous to doctor giving a prescription for marijuana because it involves engaging in a specific act designed to provide treatment. In contrast, the speech at issue in NIFLA, notice requirements that regulated the information a provider must give to its patients, is more analogous to a doctor recommending that a patient use marijuana because both consider information that a provider may discuss with a patient.
TL;DR: You can have opinions on “conversion therapy” or medical marijuana, and discuss the options with a patient. But you can no more conduct/prescribe “conversion therapy” than you could prescribe medical marijuana. Prescribing marijuana is unlawful, so “conversion therapy is unlawful. Or so Bryan thinks.
Except that in Washington, it islawful to prescribe medical marijuana, and had been for decades when Bryan made that error-riddled ruling.
You’d think that a professionally, and mentally, competent judge could come up with a better comparison. Or at least one that wasn’t exactly the fricking opposite of what he was claiming. Considering the two cases together…
“Might makes right.” That’s one heck of a constitutional test. And I can hardly wait to see what the Ninth Circuit makes of the proposition. Do they uphold the state’s ban, or do they do a quick head count to see who has more guns and might — the state or the people — and decide accordingly?
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. Gab Pay link
(More Tip Jar Options)
Today is D-Day, and I suppose in a lead up to D-Day Shimshon and I have been watching some (what I consider) relevant movies and documentaries. We started watching Band of Brothers last week and a couple of nights ago finished it. One of the episodes is called “Why We Fight”. If you haven’t seen Band of Brothers I’ll give you the relevant point. The war is pretty much over, a few of the men from Easy Company are out in the woods on patrol, just kind of clearing the area when they run across the first concentration camp they’ve seen. They don’t know what it is. They send one of the men back to headquarters to try to find an officer. He finds Dick Winters (who was a very good officer, and I suspect and even better human) and the next scene is of a few officers; Ronald Speirs, Lewis Nixon and some of the rest of Easy Company including Joesph Liebgott. This mattered because Liebgott spoke German. In the first part of the episode many of the men had been questioning why had they given up the years of their lives to live in trenches and fight bad men. After they saw the concentration camps, and Liebgott was able to ask them questions and relay the answers to the officers they all more fully understood the situation. Dick Winters later tells Lewis Nixon the Russians found camps that were even worse. I suspect that may have been the first time some of the boys had seen that level of depravity and evil that can be inflicted on fellow human beings. The next lesson the men learned was “cultured, civilized” people are perfectly capable of standing by and allowing the atrocities, murder and starvation of innocent people. When the men of Easy talked to the town people they all denied knowing anything about it. Apparently one of the Generals had a brilliant idea. The townspeople were hauled out to the concentration camp to bury the bodies. The trait is easily visible today and when someone is being attacked there will be 4,352 TikTok, YouTube and FakeBook videos of the whole thing. Of someone like Daniel Penny stepping in to help others? Not so many.
The next atrocity to be fought was in Israel. You see the Not So Great Britain was there. Last night Shimshon and I watched the 2014 Documentary The Forsaken Promise. This is the whole documentary. Not sure how long it will be there.
The League of Nations trusted Britain to establish a national home for the Jews in their historic homeland, Israel.
The “Mandate for Palestine,” an historical League of Nations document, laid down the Jewish legal right to settle anywhere in western Palestine, a 10,000-square-miles3 area between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.
The legally binding document was conferred on April 24, 1920 at the San Remo Conference, and its terms outlined in the Treaty of Sèvres on August 10, 1920. The Mandate’s terms were finalized and unanimously approved on July 24, 1922, by the Council of the League of Nations, which was comprised at that time of 51 countries,4 and became operational on September 29, 1923.5
The “Mandate for Palestine” was not a naive vision briefly embraced by the international community in blissful unawareness of Arab opposition to the very notion of Jewish historical rights in Palestine. The Mandate weathered the test of time: On April 18, 1946, when the League of Nations was dissolved and its assets and duties transferred to the United Nations, the international community, in essence, reaffirmed the validity of this international accord and reconfirmed that the terms for a Jewish National Home were the will of the international community, a “sacred trust” – despite the fact that by then it was patently clear that the Arabs opposed a Jewish National Home, no matter what the form.
But despite being trusted by the entire league of nations to re-establish Israel (the nation, the tribes) in Israel (the land) Britain did not do that. In fact, Britain not only limited the number of Jews fleeing hitler and the nazis, they sent refugee ships back. But, so did America under the Demoncratic President Franklin D. Roosevelt. The British disarmed the Jews living in Israel as best as they could, while arming the arabs. In the riots of the 1920s and onward the Brits would stand back and allowed the Jews they had disarmed to be slaughtered. One horrific example at 1:45:00 into the documentary details the attack of 13 April 1948 when a medical convoy was trying to get to the Hadassah hospital in the besieged Jerusalem. The convoy was carrying patients, medical personnel and supplies, it was stopped and attacked by arabs. The Brits checked every convoy trying to get into Jerusalem to make sure that none of the Jews had any weapons, so they were defenseless against the arabs. The people were butchered. No, I didn’t mean killed. There was a British outpost nearby and the soldiers wanted to intervene and were told to stand down. It is reported some of the soldiers cried as they watched the slaughter and mutilation that followed. But they didn’t do anything. There are photographs of the aftermath in the video.
When the refugee ships came in to Israel, the Brits would put the Jews in one of several prison camps. One woman was in prison for five years, she and her husband had escaped, but she lost her whole family to the nazis in the concentration camps. She told of how the British soldiers would beat the prisoners, really they were quite despicable. But if you look at the pattern of the Brits…..America vs. Britain, Ireland vs Britain, Israel vs. Britain….Britain has not been on the side of good in any of those, and in the beginning of WWII Chamberlain made appeasement with hitler, so.
There was really nothing Israel could do about it at this point. They didn’t have control of their own country. The British did, the Jewish Israelis just had to suffer at the whims of the anti-Semitic British government. Oh, yes I did mean to say that. Watch the documentary. See, when your local politicians are not in control, when they have to bow to the will of others who may not have the very best welfare of your nation at heart when making decisions, it will not turn out well. This is something to keep in mind as the traitorous criminal Joe Biden tries to turn U.S. over to the benevolent dictatorship of the W.H.O. with the pandemic treaty. WHO Pandemic Treaty Is a Threat to Liberty. They are already talking about digital tracking. Seems the injection mandates and green passports were just such a dandy paradigm that a lot of the framework is already in place. We already have the FIB so we have the SS who are willing to throw political opposition in the Gulag to prevent them from speaking out. According to whistle blower Steven Friend, it’s not the rank and file of the FIB, instead is the leadership at the top.
Which brings me to leadership. Both examples are from WWII, both of these men came from humble backgrounds. I don’t know that either of them ever aspired to fame, but G-d put something in them that was needed on that day at that time, leadership.
The first man I mentioned earlier, Ronald Speirs, clip is 1:26 seconds long.
The next man I think I may have written about before, General Norman Dutch Cota, he puts paid to the notion you have to be in your prime and in great shape to make great things happen. 7:05 seconds long.
These men fought, because they knew what lay behind them were things they loved and cared about, family, friends and a way of life, their country and freedom to live their lives as they chose. They may have known some of what they were fighting against in front of them, but I don’t think in the beginning they even fully grasped the depth of evil they were up against. Man’s inhumanity to man.
I believe G-d puts the ability to fight back against evil into every creature. I believe we have the ability to fight on despite odds being against us. Every creature.
That cat absolutely is inspiring, and yes, it’s a cat not a small dog. Dogs don’t slap or bat like that. It’s a partisan guerilla cat! It gets in, gets the job done and gets out. A Chuck Norris cat.
Yes, we have a lot stacked against U.S. right now, and many of our fellow citizens have fallen victim to the Fifth Generation Warfare being conducted against U.S. by our own corrupt government. So we may not have as many allies as we should, and have more enemies than we deserve. But we don’t get to choose that bit. We do get to choose if we will pick up the torch that was handed U.S. by the men and women of WWII. It’s all about our mindsets. Maybe we will talk to people, maybe we will contact politicians, maybe we will go to political rallies and meetings, maybe we will donate money to people like Sen. Josh Hawley that actually do fight back. Goodness knows Soros donates to the likes of Kim Fox, Kim Gardner and their ilk. Maybe we just talk to our kids and grandkids and make sure they understand truth and reality and try to offset some of the damage being done in public schools. Maybe we become more informed about issues. Maybe we join our local grassroots Second Amendment group. But there will be some way for each of us to fight, because 79 years after D-Day, we have a far better idea of why we fight than they did that day they landed on the beaches of Normandy.
This is Jim Quinn’s D-Day tribute, he’s been doing it for years. It starts after 42 seconds.
I guess Memphis, Tennessee city council members haven’t gotten any smarter since I left town. Not even smart enough to ask someone with a little knowledge firearms and law for some help.
The council is preparing a couple of gun control referendum questions. Since Tennessee is a firearms preemption state, that seems to be asking for trouble right off. But they acknowledge that, and said, What the hell; why not?
Memphis City Council to consider gun restrictions, but state law could preempt change
Memphis City Council members are poised to consider Tuesday approving two ballot referendums that would allow Memphians to vote on whether handguns should be banned in city limits without permits and whether the sale of assault rifles should be banned in the city.
If approved by city council members and then the voters, those ordinances would directly contradict state law.
The proposed language of the referendum questions is interesting… in a morbidly amusing way.
“Shall the Charter of the City of Memphis be amended to read:
1. No person shall be allowed to carry a handgun in the City of Memphis without possessing a valid handgun carry permit.
2. No person shall be allowed to carry, store, or travel with a handgun in a vehicle in the City of Memphis without possessing a valid handgun permit.”
Aside from state preemption law, that runs afoul of federal law: 18 USC 926A. I suspect active enforcement of that one — what; checkpoints on I-40 and I-55? — would cost Memphis taxpayers quite a few million dollars in lawsuit settlements.
Next up, we have this gem.
“Shall the Charter of the City of Memphis be amended to read:
1. Hereafter, the Commercial Sale of Assault Rifles within the City of Memphis is unlawful and is hereby prohibited.
2. The provisions of this Chapter shall not apply to the Commercial Sale of Assault Rifles to:
-insert the usual law enforcement and military exceptions-
Huh. “Assault rifles;” not some vague, undefined “assault weapon.” I am pleased to see that question 2 leaves AR-pattern firearms (like the actual AR-15) alone. But given the restrictions of the National Firearms Act of 1934, I really don’t see much point in it. Lawful transfers of machine guns already require background checks, taxes, and long delays; whether a commercial sale or private. Oh, and a lot of money for the gun itself.
No, not too bright at all. But then, they do still have a Ford on the council. I think Edmund, Sr. is the one who called for blacks to rise up, riot, and destroy the city that one 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. Gab Pay link
(More Tip Jar Options)
Guns ARE the problem. Here4TheKids is a national movement with a state focus.
We demand that Colorado Governor Jared Solis sign an executive order to ban guns and buy them back.
An executive order pushes Democrats to finally TAKE REAL ACTION to put an end to this nightmare.
They plan to hold a sit-in — which somehow isn’t a “protest” — in Denver on June 5, 2023. If Solis is psychotic enough to do as they wish, their “nightmare” has just begun.
Their site doesn’t list any contact email; just a couple of form to “volunteer” or register for the sit-in. I guess they don’t want to answer any inconvenient questions. Like…
1. You may not like it, but doesn’t the Second Amendment exist?
2. Didn’t HELLER establish the the right to keep and bear arms preexisted the Second Amendment; that it only protects a right that exists anyway?
3. Didn’t MCDONALD establish that the Second Amendment is incorporated to the states, meaning Colorado and Solis have tto obey it, too?
4. Didn’t BRUEN establish that restrictions on the Second with no general, historical tradition are unconstitutional; and that it protects arms beyond those in existence at the time of ratification?
5. Does this mean that Here4TheKids is advocating for the overthrow — by fiat executive order, no less — of the Second Amendment and the Constitution that established the authority of the Supreme Court? Basically, the overthrow of our Constitutional representative republic. The overthrow of the government?
6. Doesn’t that get into treason territory?
So… another set of victim-disarming lefties who want to do away with the Constitution and courts. As I recently noted:
Baker had better hope that the Courts don’t get disavowed. The little remaining confidence in the courts is the only thing standing between himself, and his doorkickers, and six to twelve million heavily armed, non-compliant SOBs.
A final question for the lunatics at Here4TheKids: Do you really want to declare Hunting Season… on yourselves? Because once we can no longer rely on the Constitution, Courts, or basic sanity on the part of idiots like you, I’m afraid there are some who would be happy to take matters into their own hands, and rid themselves of infringers.
And their cheerleaders. Like you.
We’ll try to talk those excitable folks down, but if you actually manage to field confiscating door-kickers, it won’t be easy.
And we’ll have less incentive to try to control them.
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. Gab Pay link
(More Tip Jar Options)
…every time some victim-disarming leftist says they don’t “feel safe” about honest people being armed; that our guns make them “feel” unsafe.
Leftist Reporter: It is “Bourgeois” to Want to Feel Safe on Public Transit
“But, like, my fear is not like the primary…primary object of what we should be focusing on right now. It’s the fact that that person is in pain. And so, like, the politics of dehumanization, privileges, the bourgeois kind of concern of people’s immediate discomfort in this narrow, narrow instance, as opposed to larger humanity and life, it’s really freakin twisted.”
If our guns make them feel unsafe, then our guns is not what they should be focusing on.
They just need mental health assistance. She said so.
Unless there’s an objective reason for our guns making them feel unsafe, like what they’d like to do to us if we were unarmed.
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. Gab Pay link
(More Tip Jar Options)
Senator Menendez [Scumbag-NJ] has filed a bill titled “Help Empower Americans to Respond (HEAR) Act” (no bill number yet) to ban silencers* (except for law enforcement and military, of course). Because with a silencers, victims can’t “HEAR” perps coming. There’s a matching companion bill in the House.
It’s fairly standard “ban” language, without grandfathering. Owners would have 60 days from the bill’s enactment to get rid of their property. Grants would be made to fund “buy backs.”
To show why this idiotic ban is “needed” Menendez cites five cases, over twelve years, in which “silencers have [allegedly] been used in gun violence related incidents over the last decade.” Let’s take a look at his examples, and see why I added “allegedly.”
1. In Monterey Park, California, on January 21, 2023, an armed assailant with a semi-automatic weapon modified with a homemade suppressor killed 11 people and injured nine others.
He used an illegal, homemade suppressor on a banned “California assault weapon.” his MAC-style firearm (law enforcement have identified it as both a MAC and a Cobray) has long been banned in the state, as have silencers. No doubt another redundant ban would have persuaded him to find another way to kill his victims. Oh, yes; and he had a second non-silenced gun.
2. In Virginia Beach, Virginia, on May 31, 2019, a gunman armed with a .45-caliber handgun fitted with a suppressor killed 12 people in a government building. One individual who survived the shooting reported hearing what sounded like a nail gun.
People in the building did hear the shots. And he used two handguns; only one of which was silenced.
3. In Jacksonville, Florida, in December 2017, police arrested a man for planning to “shoot up” an Islamic Center. He was charged with possessing a silencer not registered to him that he purchased from an undercover detective.
He did not use a silencer in an act of “gun violence.” He possessed one that he bought unlawfully (from a cop)
4. In Southern California, in February 2013, a former Los Angeles police officer killed four people, and wounded three others over the course of nine days. As police investigated, they wondered why nearby residents were not reporting the shots. It turned out that, in an effort to conceal his murders, the shooter was using a silencer, which distorts the sound of gunfire and masks the muzzle flash of a gun.
Again, California; silencers were already banned, It didn’t deter him. And so long as Menendez id bringing up Christopher Dorner’s little rampage, how ’bout mentioning the civilians the police mistakenly shot up?
5. In Toledo, Ohio, in January 2011, a man fatally shot his coworker as he sat eating his breakfast in his office. No one at the office heard the gunshot and the victim’s co-workers originally assumed he had died of a heart attack. Police later surmised that the killer had used a silencer.
The description of this one was vague enough that it took me a few minutes to find the case. The authorities only speculated that he used a silencer, but were never able to establish that as a fact.
Twelve years. Five cases. Two cases where silencers were already banned, two cases where silencers apparently were used. That leaves… counting on fingers… one case where a ban theoretically might have helped, assuming the murderous perp was worried about the extra silencer charge. If laws against murder didn’t stop, why would laws against silencers do it?
I love this pair of quotes from Violence Policy Center and Newtown Action Alliance toadies in support of the bill.
“Manufacturers brag that silencers can make guns ‘whisper quiet’ while increasing shooters’ accuracy and ability to fire rounds more quickly. These characteristics only make silencers more attractive to mass shooters and terrorists.”
“Silencers are dangerous weapons that make it easier for criminals to kill innocent Americans and more difficult for our police officers to protect our children and families. It’s time for Congress to pass this lifesaving legislation.”
So silencers are only attractive to mass shooter and terrorists, to kill innocent Americans…
Then why the hell does this bill exempt law enforcement and military from the ban? Are they mass shooters and terrorists bent on murdering innocents. And do you want them to do that?
* Yes, I think “suppressor” is a more accurate term, but federal law calls them “silencers,” so I’m kind stuck with it when discussing law.
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. Gab Pay link
(More Tip Jar Options)
Lefty Russ Baker says it’s time to get rid of America’s guns. And that pesky Second Amendment isn’t a problem. If he’s trying to climb out of his recent obscurity, he didn’t think it through. His solution?
Just ignore it.
Why Nearly All of America’s 400 Million Guns Have Got To Go
Everyone already knows all the reasons “nothing will be done.” Congress, as currently constituted, will not pass meaningful legislation. We need a better Congress. Courts are more interested in protecting the dubiously cited Second Amendment than in protecting kids. We need better judges and better law.
[…]
So I would say that the rest of us need to stop mollifying them. Forget all that nonsense about the Second Amendment.
Just forget it. After all…
Obviously it won’t be easy, and a small number of Second Amendment hard-liners will resist violently
Only a few will resist. Of course, that’s “only a few” of more than one hundred million people. Based on surveys I’ve seen for the past few years, more like 120 million. Russ’ stormtroopers will be in trouble if even 5% of 120 million “resist violently.” Six millions HANSOBs would make quick work of them, despite Baker’s irrational belief otherwise.
None will actually defend us against our military or other militaries. Guns in the hands of untrained, unvetted, potentially irresponsible users do much more harm than good. Period.
Untrained? He might note the large number of gun-owning military veterans. Or the competetion in the field of firearms training classes. Or the millions of concealed carry licensees, which is several states requires training.
The boy is delusional.
But note his disdain for the courts upholding that stupid 2A. Where have we seen that before?
Occasionally-firing-Cortex, demanding that the Xiden administration just ignore court decisions that she’s dislikes.
I do see that Baker does like one — former — Justice’s “opinion” on the 2A.
Even conservative Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren Burger said the argument that it referred to individual gun ownership (and not the clearly stated “well-regulated militia” being necessary to “the security of a free State”) was a misrepresentation of the Constitution, law, and history.
I love how these anti-rights types trot out that Parade magazine opinion from an elderly retiree. If Burger truly thought that the 2A was being misinterpreted…
why didn’t he use his position as Chief Justice to espouse it, instead of waiting until retirement to write an opinion column not subject to Associate Justice ridicule and judicial dissent?
I’ll see Baker’s 30-something year-old magazine opinion, and raise him four real SCOTUS decisions: HELLER, MCDONALD, CAETANO, and BRUEN. That’s on top of MILLER, CRUIKSHANK, PRESSER, and even DRED SCOTT, all prior to Burger’s little adventure in post-retirement attention-seeking.
Baker had better hope that the Courts don’t get disavowed. The little remaining confidence in the courts is the only thing standing between himself, and his doorkickers, and six to twelve million heavily armed, non-compliant SOBs.
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. Gab Pay link
(More Tip Jar Options)
Twit “Ballin” has answered the question of who will volunteer to bell the confiscation cat; kick in doors and grab the guns.
He will. Just as soon as the Second Amendment is “banned.” This was a reply to Creepy Uncle Gropey’s Twitter announcement* that he’s running for pseudo-reelection.
Ban the second amendment, I will start up a gun confiscation team where me and my brothers will start going door to door and arresting those who don’t hand their firearms in.
No doubt he thinks the senile groper-in-chief will just sign an executive order “banning” a Constitutional amendment. He doesn’t seem too bright, so I doubt he’s actually considered the magnitude of the task he’s set himself.
I do hope he and his brothers provide their own body bags. If not, well… canvas, lime, pigs, coyotes, gators… We’ll have it covered.
* An interesting announcement video; 3 minutes of interspersed audio and video clips, mostly from previous appearances and statements. Apparently they couldn’t get 3 minutes of him simply speaking coherently, specifically on his reelection.
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. Gab Pay link
(More Tip Jar Options)
Unlike the old Brady Bill waiting period, this one isn’t limited to purchases from FFLs, nor is it just five days
SEC. 2. 7-DAY WAITING PERIOD REQUIRED BEFORE THE RECEIPT OF A FIREARM.
(a) Prohibition.—Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
“(aa) (1) It shall be unlawful for any person, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, to transfer a firearm to a person not licensed under this chapter unless at least 7 calendar days have elapsed since the transferee most recently offered to take possession of the firearm.
Any person, any transfer, with very few exceptions; all temporary.
“(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to a temporary transfer if the transferor has no reason to believe that the transferee will use or intends to use the firearm in a crime or is prohibited from possessing firearms under State or Federal law, and the transfer takes place and the transferee’s possession of the firearm is exclusively—
At a range, hunting, or if the owner is physically present the whole time.
There are no exceptions for family members, not even for inheriting family heirlooms when granddad dies.
How exactly this would be enforced is left unexplained. It would seem to require complete firearm/owner registration (not in the bill), or an army of ATF agents swarming the country to make entrapping private purchases.
Seeing as how they still haven’t figured out how to get blackmarket dealers in stolen guns to comply with background check requirements, this seems unlikely to do anything about real malum in se crime.
Not that it’s really meant to.
It’s probably worth noting that this bill is co-sponsored by New Hampshire’s own Ann Kuster, who may be the stupidest member of Congress whose impairment isn’t obviously due to physical damage, or over-medication.
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. Gab Pay link
(More Tip Jar Options)
Jews. Guns. No compromise. No surrender.
Password Reset
Please enter your e-mail address. You will receive a new password via e-mail.
