Jump to content

Dumak_from_arfcom

Members
  • Posts

    667
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Dumak_from_arfcom's Achievements

Member

Member (14/24)

  1. You had to know they weren't going to stop with PICA. They want guns gone or far more expensive and time consuming than the plebs can afford. Sinister intentions all of it. The mistake was not going on offense the second we got the Bruen decision.
  2. Clearly unconstitutional on the training requirement. It makes firearm purchases fall under may issue for the public safety. Again.. Bruen. It makes the FOID completely redundant, but lets anti-gun LEOs deny all firearm purchases for their jurisdiction.
  3. I think the SCOTUS will rule against the ATF on regulatory power, but not on any 2A issue. ACB was asking why Congress didn't address it.
  4. I agree. The .mil adopting a civilian gun or modifying a civilian gun for its own purposes destroys Easterbrook's military test. Still, if we stick to how guns function (lever, semi, bolt, revolver) all of those guns were at one time or still in use by the military. Easterbrook's test would result in a ban on every gun. (Youtube video) It looks like Judge McGlynn is telling us that we need to argue Heller and Bruen, and argue against the Friedman/Bevis military test. (More Youtube) Now we've got 15 or more points to work on that Judge McGlynn is asking for. Is he asking for a 15 point summary for every single gun listed in PICA?
  5. Yep. The mossberg 590 is a current .mil shotgun correct? It was in use by civilians before the military picked it up. The 870 was service shotgun before switching to the 590? Beretta 92 series. 1911s. etc etc. Glocks. All being relatively in modern use by various .mil units. That is a good way to show many guns aren't just reserved for US.mil use. The 92 series was in use by civilians before it was adopted by the military as the M9. Same for the P320. The P226.
  6. And the correct argument for our lawyers is to declare it Easterbrook's interest balancing. Then use your example that any item can be used for unlawful purposes. Then when they get to the military test. Just about every action (lever, bolt, revolver, trap door, musket, semi-auto, auto) have been used by the military at one time. So Easterbrook's military test would allow a ban on virtually every type of gun which is in violation of Heller's common use.
  7. These petitions are simply a cry of shenanigans. Millions of people have their rights infringed and the CA courts are essentially playing wack a mole with the cases and still refusing to follow Bruen and clinging to bad law by trying to set new tests. Bruen was what? 2022? Yet here we are. The Justices can't be blind as to what is going on. If they don't step in, that means they are okay with the games being played by the lower courts. If that is the case, then resources would be better spent on moving vans and dropping all the lawsuits in the unfriendly circuits. Just have a tiny town in Texas or someplace take one for the team and pass an AWB so it makes it way rapidly through a more friendly appeals circuit. If the anti-gun commies can game the system, why shouldn't we?
×
×
  • Create New...