Professional Soldiers ® - Protecting the Second Amendment – Why all Americans Should Be Concerned

Professional Soldiers ® (http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/index.php)

- The Soapbox (http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=93)

- - Protecting the Second Amendment – Why all Americans Should Be Concerned (http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=40772)

Quote:

Originally Posted by GratefulCitizen (Post 679725)

Machine guns protected by the Second Amendment.

https://ecf.ksd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin...2023cr10047-35

This is about to get very interesting.

One step closer to the NFA being eliminated.

https://www.ksnt.com/news/local-news...20the%2520case.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GratefulCitizen (Post 679916)

One step closer to the NFA being eliminated.

https://www.ksnt.com/news/local-news...20the%2520case.

This case is the brass-ring in the keystone of the .gov’s untenable assault on the 2A. If the judge (s) can read and comprehend the English language, then the NFA is akin to a tax on churches. But, hey, here’s to hopeful thinking…. And hope isn’t a COA.

Idaho leads coalition of majority of states in amicus brief advocating for granting of cert for AR ban case:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketP..._Snope_921.pdf

If SCOTUS grants cert, and rules consistent with Bruen, the “assault weapon” ban issue will be dead.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GratefulCitizen (Post 679923)

Nice news, GC, thanks for the brief link.

State attorney irritates a federal judge in Second Amendment case:
https://storage.courtlistener.com/re...9397.122.0.pdf

YouTuber breakdown:
https://youtu.be/Cbh1GgQCzcE?si=DWBALP1fG-hRwKVm

Never, EVER mess around with “Rule 11 (b)”…… either in court or on the street, 11 (b) will f-up your day!

Quote:

Originally Posted by GratefulCitizen (Post 679929)

State attorney irritates a federal judge in Second Amendment case:
https://storage.courtlistener.com/re...9397.122.0.pdf

YouTuber breakdown:
https://youtu.be/Cbh1GgQCzcE?si=DWBALP1fG-hRwKVm

That's great, lol.

NAGR submits excellent amicus brief advocating for SCOTUS to accept cert in AR-15 ban case:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketP...us%20Brief.pdf

Specifically, they emphasize that the AR-15 is MORE protected by the Second Amendment than handguns because it is better suited to resist tyranny, the issue with which the Founders were quite preoccupied.
They also go into the problems with waiting for a circuit split in Second Amendment cases.

New York ban on carrying on private property struck down:

https://assets.nationbuilder.com/fir...pdf?1728581804

Quote:

Originally Posted by GratefulCitizen (Post 679980)

New York ban on carrying on private property struck down:

https://assets.nationbuilder.com/fir...pdf?1728581804

Judge John L. Sinatra, Jr. - Trump appointee.

"...permanently enjoined, effective immediately..." My kinda guy.
:cool:

Fed Appeals Court Strikes Down Illinois AWB

News article about it.

IL was enjoined from enforcement but with a 30-day stay so IL can decide whether to appeal. They may not do that, given that SCOTUS already frowned at IL over the same case and sent it back to "clarify" (again) what was meant by all the other decisions from them.

Quote:

“Most importantly, considering all of the evidence presented, the Court holds that the provisions of PICA criminalizing the knowing possession of specific semiautomatic rifles, shotguns, magazines, and attachments are unconstitutional under the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution as applied to the states by the Fourteenth Amendment.

Therefore, the Plaintiffs’ request for a permanent injunction is GRANTED. The State of Illinois is hereby ENJOINED from the enforcement of PICA’s criminal penalties in accordance with 720 ILL. COMP. STAT. §§ 5/24-1(a)(14)–(16) (bump stocks and assault weapons); 5/24-1.9(a)–(h) (assault weapons and attachments); and 5/24-1.10(a)–(h) (large-capacity magazines) against all Illinois citizens, effective immediately.

As the prohibition of firearms is unconstitutional, so is the registration scheme for assault weapons, attachments, and large-capacity magazines. Therefore, the State of Illinois is ENJOINED from enforcing the firearm registration requirements and penalties associated with entering false information on the endorsement affidavit for non-exempt weapons, magazines, and attachments previously required to be registered in accordance with 430 ILL. COMP. STAT. 65/4.1.

This permanent injunction is STAYED for thirty (30) days. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to enter judgment in favor of the Plaintiffs. IT IS SO ORDERED.”

:cool:

Early Christmas Present

EXSUM: Man struggling to get by with wife & raising 3 kids understates his salary in application for food stamps. Turns out later that conviction - making a false statement - yields a "Denied" when trying to purchase a firearms. District Court upholds, but Third Circuit reverses with the following:

Quote:

Bryan Range appeals the District Court’s summary
judgment rejecting his claim that the federal “felon-in-
possession” law—18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1)—violates his Second
Amendment right to keep and bear arms. We agree with Range
that, despite his false statement conviction, he remains among
“the people” protected by the Second Amendment. And
because the Government did not carry its burden of showing
that the principles underlying our Nation’s history and tradition
of firearm regulation support disarming Range, we will reverse
and remand.

Full decision here if you've nothing else to do.
:cool:

Quote:

Originally Posted by GratefulCitizen (Post 680589)

Nationwide carry.
We’ll see if it goes anywhere.

https://massie.house.gov/news/docume...umentID=395683
https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-...5C%22%29%22%7D

Pondering how much things have been improved (court cases, etc.) and how much of the same ground has still to be plowed with The Letter and this thread now 12 Years down the road.
:rolleyes: