Protecting the Second Amendment – Why all Americans Should Be Concerned

[Badger52]

Originally Posted by tonyz

When folks feel that the government - might not be able to protect them - and then authorities simultaneously release criminals onto the streets...the people predictably vote with their pocketbook.

NICS Firearm Background Checks:
Month/Year
November 30, 1998 - March 31, 2020

March 2020

3,740,688 background checks

https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/...month_year.pdf

ETA: another economic impact of the China Virus - the industry was stagnant and then the world changed.

I'm not much into that stat EXCEPT for the effect it has on the ones it terrifies. Especially when they think about the freeman to freeman exchanges of goods & property that don't get NICS checks.


One can hope that home invasions decline. Everyone seems to be at home with enough guns & bleach & paper towels to take care of the WHOLE job.

[tonyz]

Originally Posted by Badger52

I'm not much into that stat EXCEPT for the effect it has on the ones it terrifies. Especially when they think about the freeman to freeman exchanges of goods & property that don't get NICS checks.


One can hope that home invasions decline. Everyone seems to be at home with enough guns & bleach & paper towels to take care of the WHOLE job.

Lol, THAT “stat” is potentially big. Potentially very big - from a number of potential perspectives - if properly leveraged.

The most obvious is the sheer volume. Realize, that’s the largest month EVAH...nearly 4 million and yes...there are probably more freeman to freeman.

Moreover, many obtaining firearms this late in the game are most likely first time firearm owners (who else is paying top dollar and standing in line for shit they were practically giving away 2 months ago...first timers). First timers, who are now truly aware that sometimes big-daddy Gov might not be there when you dial 911...they truly realized that they and their family just might be alone if first responders go down in a pandemic...with politicians letting even more bad guys loose on the street. This might be the very first time in their lives that the Second Amendment actually had some real meaning to them.

I hope that they remember that moment of realization - even if brief - come November 2020 and beyond.

Oh, I’ll bet that there’s also a lot of first time folks who’ll need a friend to take them to a range and show them the ropes.

That’s a lot of the precious middle we say we need/want to cultivate come election time...folks previously undecided or at least agnostic on an issue...who just made a decision.

We sure can reinforce the wisdom of that decision.

ETA: OH, and when this pandemic runs its course...there may be a huge opportunity to pick up some very lightly used weapons at discount prices.

[bblhead672]

Another consideration on those NICS numbers...they do not include states like Texas where holders of License to Carry/Concealed Handgun licenses are not required to be checked through NICS by FFL's selling them firearms.

[Badger52]

Originally Posted by tonyz

Oh, I’ll bet that there’s also a lot of first time folks who’ll need a friend to take them to a range and show them the ropes.

That sir is quite true. It's deemed an essential item, well, hell, it's essential that it and its owner be regulated (in the classic sense).

I've armed a few neighbors or folks that have become solid acquaintances in my life; range time is a great time to cement more than safe practices & the weapon's zero.

[tonyz]

Interesting perspective from CA.

Virus-Panicked Liberal Gun Buyers Are Getting Angry When They Discover Their Own Gun Control Laws
Posted at 1:15 pm on April 10, 2020
by Kira Davis
Red State

I was chatting with a friend of mine recently and the topic of gun sales came up. My friend’s father owns a gun range near me and she said he’s seen a huge amount of liberals coming in to purchase weapons in recent weeks.

How does he know they’re liberals?

“They’re shocked to discover they can’t just walk out of the store with a gun.”

We’ve all heard about gun sales skyrocketing recently, but I hadn’t considered some of the tangential effects of the phenomenon until I spoke to my friend. Not only are many liberals suddenly learning to love their Second Amendment rights, many of them are finding out that the gun control narrative in this country — as repeated loudly and often by Hollywood and the mainstream media — is a complete lie.

So, I contacted my friend’s father to ask about what he is seeing personally at his own range these days. Gregg Bouslog runs On-Target Indoor Shooting Range in Laguna Niguel, CA. It’s where I taught my son to shoot and where I’ll teach my daughter once the chaos lifts. He says that while others are stuck at home while the economy grinds to a halt, he’s been working nonstop at the range as the applications for background checks and permits are stacking up daily. Bouslog claims he hasn’t done business like this since the days of Obama.

As the owner of an indoor shooting range and gun store here in California these past 14 years we have never experienced such a huge demand for firearms and ammunition – even higher than the famous Obama rush of 2012/2013.

While it’s nice to see some businesses flourishing in these scary times, Bouslog says that safety has been a huge issue at the range, as many first-time buyers seem to have gotten all of their notions about guns and gun safety from television.

We tried to look at just who the new firearm purchasers were and we believe that more than 60% of these individuals were first time buyers. I can’t describe the amount of fear in my staff as we had the buyers show proof of safe handling as part of the purchase process as required by law. You have never seen so many barrels pointed at sales staff and other customers. It was truly frightening. We had to keep stopping the process to give quick safety lessons. We are adding many more basic classes in the coming weeks and encouraged these buyers to please attend. We hope they do.

This isn’t hard to believe. As a gun-owner who formerly abhorred the Second Amendment, I can personally testify to the fact that most people who believe they are anti-gun are actually just anti-stupid. They just don’t realize they’re projecting their own stupidity onto law-abiding gun owners. They imagine that we gun owners are just a bunch of yahoos out here combing our mullets, waving our guns around to look sexy while we look for anything or anyone to shoot at any time. They have no respect for the power of a weapon and treat them accordingly, which is what Bouslog is witnessing firsthand at his range. We gun owners, of course, take safety, care and precautions quite seriously. These are ingrained in the culture of gun ownership.

While the safety of the employees at the range is a very serious matter, the most amusing and annoying part for the staff has been watching these first-time buyers discover just how stringent gun laws in California really are, including one of our newest laws requiring background checks before buying ammunition. Bouslog says it’s a bridge too far for the people who have been told their whole lives that it’s easier to get a gun than an abortion.

More than a dozen of these buyers (men and women) actually thought that since they filled out and signed everything, they could just walk out and go home with the firearm. Several actually said they saw how easy it was to buy a gun on TV and why did they have to fill out all these forms.

The majority of these first timers lost their minds when we went through the Ammo Law requirements. Most used language not normally heard, even in a gun range. We pointed out that since no one working here voted for these laws, then maybe they might know someone who did. And, maybe they should go back and talk to those people and tell them to re-think their position on firearms – we were trying to be nice.

Most were VERY vocal about why it takes 10 days minimum (sometimes longer if the DOJ is backed up) to take their property home with them. They ask why do I need to wait 10 days if I need the protection today or tomorrow? We pointed out again that no one working here voted in support of that law.

They really went crazy when we told them that for each firearm they had to do the same amount of paperwork and they could only purchase ONE handgun every 30 days. Again, we didn’t [vote] for that law.

We had people cuss at us and stomp out when we explained that secondary identification had to be part of the paperwork, as they felt insulted that what they had wasn’t good enough. We have a number of Yelp reviews calling us names and other things about how bad we are because of this whole new buyer rush
Again, I truly hope for the safety of those range employees in the face of so many uninformed and incurious first-time buyers. That being said, I find this whole situation fascinating. So many things in our economy and way of life are shifting monumentally these days. Could the gun control battle be one of them?

I discovered the idiocy of my anti-gun beliefs once I decided to learn about them firsthand. The Hollywood mystique immediately fell away and I was imbued with a new respect for weaponry and the people who dedicate their lives to weapons safety and serving and protecting the Second Amendment. You can’t know how bonkers our gun control laws are until you go try to buy one yourself.

There are a lot of people like me out there right now — first-timers and Second Amendment haters who feel like a hypocrite for wanting a gun for protection. Like I did, now they are navigating our convoluted gun laws for themselves and discovering that it is just not possible to walk into a store, buy a gun and leave with it in your pocket.

As these revelations begin to spread among our liberal brethren in the state of California, will we see a shift in gun laws and support for anti-Second Amendment legislators? Only time will tell, but it will surely be an interesting question to ponder in the coming months and years.

https://www.redstate.com/kiradavis/2020/04/10/815520/

[Badger52]

Originally Posted by Article's author

As these revelations begin to spread among our liberal brethren in the state of California, will we see a shift in gun laws and support for anti-Second Amendment legislators? Only time will tell, but it will surely be an interesting question to ponder in the coming months and years.

I'll keep my money in my wallet thank you.

Nice job posting this here. Saw it over at Herschel's place and ya beat me to it.

[tonyz]

April 19, 1775 Battles of Lexington and Concord: The American Revolution Begins

Guest Essayist: David B. Kopel
Constituting America

During the first six decades of the eighteenth century, the American colonies were mostly allowed to govern themselves. In exchange, they loyally fought for Great Britain in imperial wars against the French and Spanish. But in 1763, after the British and Americans won the French and Indian War, King George III began working to eliminate American self-government.

The succeeding years saw a series of political crises provoked by the king and parliament. What turned the political dispute into a war was arms confiscation at Lexington and Concord, Massachusetts, on April 19, 1775.

In 1774, the British government had realized that because armed Americans were so numerous, they could not be frightened into compliance with British demands. So in the latter months of 1774, the King and his Royal Governors in America instituted a gun control program. All firearms and ammunition imports to the American colonies were forbidden. At the governors’ command, British soldiers began raiding American armories, which stored firearms for militiamen who could not afford their own, and also held large quantities of gunpowder. Because the raids were accomplished peacefully in surprise pre-dawn maneuvers, they caused outrage, but nothing more. Both sides knew that if the British attempted to seize arms by force, the Americans would fight.

Ever since 1768, Boston had been occupied by a British army. In April 1775, a spy informed British General Gage that the Americans had secreted a large quantity of gunpowder in Concord, Massachusetts. Gage ordered his army to seize the American powder. This time, the Americans found out in advance.

On the night of April 18, 1775, British warships conveyed Redcoats across Boston Harbor, so they could march to Concord. Meanwhile, Paul Revere and William Dawes rode from town to town, shouting the warning “The British are coming.” The alarm was spread far and wide by the ringing of church bells and firing of guns.

To get to Concord, the British would have to march through Lexington; while the men of Lexington prepared to meet the British, the women of Lexington assembled ammunition cartridges late into the night.

The American Revolution began at dawn on April 19, 1775, when 700 Redcoats commanded by Major John Pitcairn confronted 200 Lexington militia on the town green. The militiamen, consisting of almost all able-bodied men sixteen to sixty, supplied their own firearms, although a few poor men had to borrow a gun.

“Disperse you Rebels—Damn you, throw down your Arms and disperse!” ordered Major Pitcairn. American folklore remembers the perhaps apocryphal words of militia commander Captain John Parker: “Don’t fire unless fired upon! But if they want to have a war, let it begin here!” The American policy was to put the onus of firing first on the British. Yet someone pulled a trigger, and although the gun did not go off, the sight of the powder flash in the firing pan instantly prompted the Redcoats to mass fire. The Americans were quickly routed.

With a “huzzah” of victory, the Redcoats marched on to Concord. By one account, the first man in Concord to assemble after the sounding of the alarm was the Reverend William Emerson, gun in hand.

At Concord’s North Bridge, the town militia met with some of the British army, and after a battle of two or three minutes, drove off the Redcoats. As the Reverend’s grandson, poet Ralph Waldo Emerson, later recounted in the “Concord Hymn”:

By the rude bridge that arched the flood,

Their flag to April’s breeze unfurled,

Here once the embattled farmers stood,

And fired the shot heard round the world.

Notwithstanding the setback at the bridge, the Redcoats had sufficient force to search the town for arms and ammunition. But the main powder stores at Concord had been hauled to safety before the British arrived.

Having failed to get the gunpowder, the British began to withdraw back to Boston. On the way, things got much worse for them as armed Americans swarmed in from nearby towns. Soon they outnumbered the British two-to-one.

Some armed American women fought in the battle. So did men of color, including David Lamson, leading a group of elderly men who, like him, were too old to be in the militia, but intended to fight anyway.

Although some Americans cohered in militia units, many just fought on their own, taking sniper positions wherever the opportunity presented itself.

Rather than fight in open fields, like European soldiers, the Americans hid behind natural barriers, fired from ambush positions, and harried the Redcoats all the way back to Boston.

One British officer complained that the Americans acted like “rascals” and fought as “concealed villains” with “the cowardly disposition . . . to murder us all.” Another officer reported: “These fellows were generally good marksmen, and many of them used long guns made for Duck-Shooting.”

The British expedition was nearly wiped out. It saved from annihilation by reinforcements from Boston—and by the fact that the Americans started running out of ammunition and gunpowder.

British Lieutenant-General Hugh Percy, who had led the rescue of the beleaguered expeditionary force, recounted:

“Whoever looks upon them as an irregular mob, will find himself much mistaken. They have men amongst them who know very well what they are about, having been employed as Rangers [against] the Indians & Canadians, & this country being much [covered with] wood, and hilly, is very advantageous for their method of fighting. Nor are several of their men void of a spirit of enthusiasm, as we experienced yesterday, for many of them concealed themselves in houses, & advanced within [ten yards] to fire at me & other officers, tho’ they were morally certain of being put to death themselves in an instant.”

At day’s end, there were 50 Americans killed, 39 wounded, and 5 missing. Among the British 65 were killed, 180 wounded, and 27 missing. On a per-shot basis, the Americans inflicted higher casualties than the British regulars.

That night, the Americans began laying siege to Boston where General Gage’s standing army was located. Soon, the British would begin confiscating guns in Boston. Reinforced by volunteers from other colonies, and commanded by General George Washington, the American forces would maintain the siege of Boston until the British gave up and sailed away on March 17, 1776.

https://constitutingamerica.org/apri...david-b-kopel/

Further reading: David B. Kopel, How the British Gun Control Program Precipitated the American Revolution, 38 Charleston Law Review 283 (2012).

[tonyz]

More history - excerpts below.

Complete article at link - complete article worth a look.

Patriots’ Day: The Forgotten History of America’s Patriots’ Day and What it Commemorates

by Sam Jacobs
April 19, 2020, 10:00 AM
Ammo.com

While it’s not celebrated too widely outside of New England, Patriots’ Day (or “Patriot’s Day” if you live in Maine) is a big deal there, primarily in the state where the Battles of Lexington and Concord actually took place – Massachusetts. For anyone reading this from New England who isn’t aware: No, you’re not getting the third Monday in April off so you can stay home and watch the Boston Marathon.

Even before the Declaration of Independence was written, there were the Battles of Lexington and Concord – the true beginning of the American Revolution. To be sure, this is something that had been brewing for some time. There was the Boston Massacre, the Boston Tea Party, and the Intolerable Acts. But the Battles of Lexington and Concord marked the first shots fired between Patriots and Tories, beginning what would eventually lead to the independence of the American colonies from the British Empire.

While the battles began as a small skirmish, they quickly became a bona fide fight – and a bridge from which the American rebels could not walk back.

Increasing Tensions in the Massachusetts Bay Colony

By the time of the battles, the British occupying troops had already earned the nickname of “redcoats,” or even “devils” depending on who you spoke to. They had been occupying Boston since 1768, and due to forced quartering as well as increased resistance on the part of the colonists, the tensions between the natives and the occupying army were only growing with time.

Boston was to some degree under the control of General Thomas Gage, military governor of Massachusetts and the commander of a garrison of some 3,000 British troops stationed in the city. However, outside of the city was a whole other issue. Indeed, it was outside of the city where the rebel sentiment held the most sway. While it is often said that one-third of colonists were Tories, another third Patriots, and another third apathetic, the Patriots held the overwhelming majority of support among Massachusetts colonists outside of Boston.

Gage planned to assert central control over the more rural parts of the Massachusetts Bay Colony by using small strikes to confiscate the Patriot militias’ supplies. He had some success in doing this in advance of the Battles of Lexington and Concord in what were known as the Powder Alarms.

Still, due to the threat of Indian raids, every town in Massachusetts was required to have a militia. And these militias needed supplies. Disarming all of them seemed unlikely at best.

Confiscating the Colonial Arms

On April 14, 1775, the order came down from the central authority in London that General Gage was to confiscate the colonial arms. On the morning of April 18, Gage sent a mounted patrol of 20 men to intercept messengers and, perhaps most importantly, to find Samuel Adams and John Hancock. It was their search for the latter two men that tipped off the colonists that something bigger was afoot. This put the residents of the area on a higher alert than they otherwise might have been.

Lieutenant Colonel Francis Smith was ordered to go relieve the Concord militia of its arms and powder, but not to disturb the locals or their property. He did not give orders to arrest the rebel leaders for fear that this would spark a huge uprising.

The Patriots had largely been alerted to both the general plan (remove their arms and powder) and the specific plan (go after the Concord militia), and the Massachusetts Provincial Congress ordered the militias to resist the British troops with force.

On April 18, in preparation for the arrival of British troops, Paul Revere took his famous “midnight ride” to warn the colonists of the area that “the British are coming.” Indeed, the colonials had intercepted the transmission from London, and knew that April 19th would be the day of the raid, even before General Gage knew. The leading lights of the rebellion left the city of Boston and laid low to avoid an arrest.

The Minutemen Are Born

The American mythos surrounding the Minutemen is about as powerful as that surrounding the cowboy. Thus it is fitting that the Minutemen were born during the battle that kicked off the struggle for American independence.

While it’s true that the Minutemen were in existence before these battles, it was during Lexington and Concord when they really came into their own as an important force. Indeed, in response to the “midnight ride,” militiamen were organized as far as 25 miles away while British troops were still landing.

Lexington was more of a minor skirmish than anything. The British troops weren’t even supposed to be there. British Marine Lieutenant Jesse Adai decided to turn right instead of left, putting him in Lexington instead of Concord.

Upon meeting up with the rebels, an unknown British officer rode in front of the British troops, waved his sword and ordered the militia to disperse, yelling “lay down your arms, you damned rebels!” For his part, the captain of the militia ordered his men to disperse, but his orders were either unheard or not obeyed. In any event, while some of the men did choose to disperse, none of them laid down their arms. Both commanding officers ordered their men not to fire, but someone did.

No one is sure who fired first. In fact, most historical sources agree that it was someone uninvolved in the fighting. Only one British troop suffered minor injuries. However, eight patriots were killed and 10 were wounded at Lexington. Most of these occurred during a British bayonet charge.

In Concord, militiamen from both Concord and neighboring Lincoln were already amassing. Tensions mounted between an advancing Patriot militia and a retreating British force at The North Bridge. A firefight broke out, leading militia commander Major Buttrick to yell out, “Fire, for God’s sake, fellow soldiers, fire!”

Fire they did. The British regulars were soon outnumbered and outmaneuvered. It was a stunning strategic victory for the American Patriot forces.

The Reaction to the Battles

It’s likely that none of the colonists expected to win this battle, nevermind to win it quite as handily as they did. Most probably didn’t even think there would be a confrontation where each side was shooting to kill. However, the early stages of the American revolution are filled with examples of the colonists being surprised as they walked further and further out onto the ledge of independence.

All told, 15,000 militiamen showed up to encircle Boston on three sides and to keep the British regulars hemmed inside the city where they could only do negligible damage. Men were pouring into the region from Rhode Island, Connecticut, and New Hampshire, forming the core of what was about to become the Continental Army.

General Gage did not declare martial law, but instead continued his move to seize private weapons by other means.

The main reason the battle was a strategic failure for the British is because it baited them into exactly the kind of confrontation they were trying to avoid by confiscating arms from the colonial militias. The battle was largely seen as the moment when the rebels crossed the metaphorical Rubicon and could not go back to the status quo antebellum.

For what it’s worth, the Patriots very heavily relied upon propaganda to paint this battle in a positive light. Inconvenient facts were suppressed and more positive aspects of the Patriots’ role in the battle were played up to give the colonists a battle they could believe in.

Over the years, the battle began to take on an almost mythic quality. Ralph Waldo Emerson’s poem “Concord Hymn” was one of the earliest post-Revolutionary attempts at lionizing the battle. “Paul Revere’s Ride” by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow was memorized by generations of schoolchildren.

Four Massachusetts National Guard units can directly tie their lineage to this battle.

The Beginnings of Patriots’ Day

In 1894, the Lexington Historical Society petitioned the Massachusetts General Court to declare April 19th “Lexington Day.” Concord wasn’t willing to let this stand and counter-petitioned that it be declared (what else?) “Concord Day.”

They were both at a bit of a loss when they found out that the biggest battle fought on April 19th was actually in Menotomy, which is now known as Arlington.

As a compromise designed to keep everyone happy, Governor Frederic T. Greenhalge proclaimed the day “Patriots’ Day,” which replaced the previous Fast Day. The new state holiday served to consolidate what had previously been a variety of local observances throughout the state. It further commemorated the first blood of the Civil War during the Baltimore Riots of 1861, where four Massachusetts militia members were killed.


Finally, the Battles of Lexington and Concord are arguably where the Second Amendment’s right to keep and bear arms was born. It was the attempt by the redcoats to seize their arms that demonstrated just how important this right was to the colonials. The Battles of Lexington and Concord were the Patriots putting their lives on the line to defend that right.

So, on April 19 (or the third Monday of April, whichever you like), go ahead and remember Patriot’s Day – why it’s celebrated and what it is intended to remember. Even if you’re not in New England, it’s important to remember the origins of our nation in a small battle outside of Boston.

<snip>

https://www.spartareport.com/2020/04...-commemorates/

[Ret10Echo]

At least there is one piece of news where the Chinese Flu isn't being used to limit rights

WEST VIRGINIA (WDVM)–West Virginia’s Attorney General is enforcing new protocols in the Mountain State, ensuring Second Amendment Rights are maintained during the pandemic.

Patrick Morrisey is advising local sheriff’s to accept mail-in concealed carry applications and renewals. The information was recently relayed to sheriffs in all 55 West Virginia counties and most will likely begin enforcing the new standard starting this coming week.

WDVM here

[Swoop]

West “By God” Virginia!

[mojaveman]

A federal judge blocked a California gun law on Thursday that required people to undergo a background check before purchasing ammunition.

Awesome. I can now buy ammo online again and have it delivered to my doorstep.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/judge-tos...kground-checks

[Badger52]

Originally Posted by Judge's Decision

"The background check experiment defies common sense while unduly and severely burdening the Second Amendment rights of every responsible, gun-owning citizen desiring to lawfully buy ammunition."

Some org with legal eagles onboard should carry that forward and get it applied to firearms where onerous UBC laws are in-place or contemplated.

[mojaveman]

A federal judge blocked a California gun law on Thursday that required people to undergo a background check before purchasing ammunition.

Looks like I spoke too soon. The 9th Circus Court reinstated background checks for ammo purchases.

Can't wait to retire and leave the People's Republik of Kalifornia.

[tonyz]

Looks like SCOTUS will be reviewing a few 2A cases beginning tomorrow.

Amy Howe
Independent Contractor and Reporter
Posted Tue, April 28th, 2020 2:28 pm

After ruling in New York gun rights case, more Second Amendment cases set for Friday conference

Yesterday the Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision in a challenge to New York City’s ban on the transport of licensed handguns outside the city. Because the city had repealed the ban last summer, a majority on the court agreed with the city that the challengers’ original claims are moot – that is, no longer a live controversy. In a concurring opinion, Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined the majority in concluding that the case should go back to the lower court, but he also indicated that he shared the concern – expressed by Justice Samuel Alito in his dissenting opinion – that the lower courts “may not be properly applying” the Supreme Court’s most recent gun rights rulings, in District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. City of Chicago. Therefore, Kavanaugh suggested, the Supreme Court “should address that issue soon, perhaps in one of the several Second Amendment cases with petitions for certiorari now pending before the Court.” The court’s electronic docket reveals that Kavanaugh’s suggestion may come to fruition soon: By the end of the day yesterday, the Supreme Court had distributed for consideration at Friday’s conference 10 cases that had apparently been on hold for the New York case.

Several themes emerge from the cases that the justices will now review on Friday. The justices are being asked to weigh in on (among other things) whether and to what extent the Second Amendment protects the right to carry a handgun outside the home for self-defense, whether state and local governments can ban assault rifles and large-capacity magazines and whether the federal ban on interstate gun sales is unconstitutional. A full list of the 10 cases distributed for Friday’s conference, as well as a brief description of the question presented in each one, follows the jump.

We expect orders from Friday’s conference on Monday, May 4, at 9:30 a.m. EDT.

Mance v. Barr – Whether the federal ban on interstate handgun sales violates the Second Amendment or the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment.

Rogers v. Grewal – In a challenge to New Jersey’s handgun carry permit scheme, whether the Second Amendment protects the right to carry a handgun outside the home for self-defense; and whether the government can condition the right to carry a handgun outside the home on the showing of a special need to carry a firearm.

Pena v. Horan – In a challenge to a California law banning most commonly used handguns, the petition asks the justices to weigh in on the scope of the Second Amendment.

Gould v. Lipson – In a challenge to Massachusetts’ handgun carry permit scheme, whether the Second Amendment protects the right to carry a handgun outside the home for self-defense; and whether the government can condition the right to carry a handgun outside the home on the showing of a special need to carry a firearm.

Cheeseman v. Polillo – Challenge to New Jersey handgun carry permit scheme.

Ciolek v. New Jersey – Challenge to New Jersey handgun carry permit scheme.

Worman v. Healey – Challenge to Massachusetts ban on the possession of assault weapons and large-capacity magazines.

Malpasso v. Pallozzi – In a challenge to Maryland’s handgun carry permit scheme, whether the Second Amendment protects the right to carry handguns outside the home for self-defense.

Culp v. Raoul – Whether the Second Amendment requires Illinois to allow nonresidents to apply for a concealed-carry license.

Wilson v. Cook County – Challenge to Cook County’s ban on assault rifles and large-capacity magazines, as well as to the Second Amendment analysis used by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit to uphold the ban.

This post was originally published at Howe on the Court.

https://www.scotusblog.com/2020/04/a...ay-conference/

[Badger52]

Thanks for that list. Plenty on the menu from which they can choose. Let's see how hungry they are.