Democrats Defy Supreme Court, Seek to Ban Common Use Guns

[Threeband]

In committee, Nadler walked right into a trap, and repeatedly said that the entire point of the proposed AWB is to ban firearms " in Common Use."




(Fast forward to 2:30.)


Rep. Dan Bishop, (R - N.C.), who set the trap, triumphantly declares that the Democrats are repeating their defiance of Brown v. Board of Education!

So how big could this be? Will this doom all gun bans nationwide?

Colion Noir has picked up on it, too, but I don't think his video brings out the potential significance of Nadler's defiance of multiple Supreme Court decisions.

 

[slsc98]

In committee, Nadler walked right into a trap, and repeatedly said that the entire point of the proposed AWB is to ban firearms " in Common Use."

Nadler is such an embarrassment …

PSA: FF to 2:30 min mark. Whew.

 

[Boondock Saint]

Text, history, and tradition.

Yield, lest the helicopters begin pre-flight checks.

 

[Threeband]

Nadler has no clue regarding the significance of the term "common use."

He doesn't realize that he is admitting to openly defying the Supreme Court. Bishop gets him to repeat it I think three times.

It really is the equivalent of declaring that their intention is to legislate "separate but equal" schools.

 

[babalou]

need to make MG in common use, as well. Only reason they are not now is because of in the 1930's. Prior to that people owned them no problemo

 

[delaware_export]

So that brings us back to how things will proceed from here.

.gov at all levels is throwing crap against the wall as fast as they can, and even saying the quiet part out loud to scotus. Spitting in their eye again.

they’re betting that it’ll take years for these Things to get through the courts.

how do we expedite this stuff? I know that groups like FPC GOA MSI and others are trying, but …

as an example of this, Hawaii has been spitting in the face of the taser case since 2016. Only in January of 2022 permitted taser sales, and are trying to ditch the outstanding cases.

Is this to be expected for all cases ? Limits? Common use? Etc

 

[babalou]

So that brings us back to how things will proceed from here.

.gov at all levels is throwing crap against the wall as fast as they can, and even saying the quiet part out loud to scotus. Spitting in their eye again.

they’re betting that it’ll take years for these Things to get through the courts.

how do we expedite this stuff? I know that groups like FPC GOA MSI and others are trying, but …

as an example of this, Hawaii has been spitting in the face of the taser case since 2016. Only in January of 2022 permitted taser sales, and are trying to ditch the outstanding cases.

Is this to be expected for all cases ? Limits? Common use? Etc

because of the ruling, their crap should not go through so fast and let them be on the ropes like we always are to counteract their crap.

 

[delaware_export]

can‘t be that. ny state passed all that bs in a week or less… so, no slowdown there… and that’s my point. Stuff like that , or delawares recent bs.. will be there for… months?years?decade? And cost lots of money to challenge… and time!!!! all while blatantly ignoring scotus and their lawfully owning citizens..

don’t mean to rant at you. But one county official ignored scotus and doesn’t issue a gay marriage license, bam! She’s in jail. within a few days. Hawaii sat on tasers for 6!!!! Years!

because of the ruling, their crap should not go through so fast and let them be on the ropes like we always are to counteract their crap.

 

[Boondock Saint]

need to make MG in common use, as well. Only reason they are not now is because of in the 1930's. Prior to that people owned them no problemo

Bruen says enumerated rights are understood to have the scope they had in 1791 at ratification of the Bill of Rights, or certainly no later than 1868 following 14A.

Text. History. Tradition.

I loathe grabbers.

I need to get my helicopter pilot license...

EDIT: It was Heller that referenced the scope of rights at those above times, but it was referenced in Bruen.

 

[babalou]

Bruen says enumerated rights are understood to have the scope they had in 1791 at ratification of the Bill of Rights, or certainly no later than 1868 following 14A.

Text. History. Tradition.

I loathe grabbers.

nice. Thanks for that

 

[RoadDawg]

Tell Nadless and his cohorts… “If you want to live in a country where the guns you hate are banned from private ownership… Venezuela may allow you to immigrate.”

And… “We’ll help you pack!”

 

[Clump]

DE gov Carney signed the laws AFTER the Bruen ruling, knowing they were unconstitutional. They will defend their actions on the taxpayers dime.

 

[Afrikeber]

Bruen says enumerated rights are understood to have the scope they had in 1791 at ratification of the Bill of Rights, or certainly no later than 1868 following 14A.

Text. History. Tradition.

I loathe grabbers.

I need to get my helicopter pilot license...

Well said, and the feeling is mutual.

 

[6-Pack]

The Bruen decision is almost the Brown v. Board equivalent for gun rights. At least it’s the closest thing that comes to mind when states actively defy the SCOTUS. Instead of desegregation, we have a different area of civil rights to contend with.

While I love music from the time before I was born (60s and 70s), I don’t know enough about the legal workings of how the SCOTUS forced southern states to get their stuff together and desegregate. I need to research more in this area, but I think it’s the closest example we have to look at.

I also think this will take a few years to resolve, but once finally resolved we’ll no longer have to worry about our rights being infringed.

Our progress so far, which has also taken years:
The 2A protects guns inside the home (Heller).
The 2A applies to the states as well as the federal government (McDonald).
The 2A protects guns outside of the home and a definitive test for handling 2A cases (Bruen).

 

[davsco]

we’ll no longer have to worry about our rights being infringed.

They've already proven they will double down every chance they get. But a boy can dream...

 

[DC-W]

The Bruen decision is almost the Brown v. Board equivalent for gun rights. At least it’s the closest thing that comes to mind when states actively defy the SCOTUS. Instead of desegregation, we have a different area of civil rights to contend with.

While I love music from the time before I was born (60s and 70s), I don’t know enough about the legal workings of how the SCOTUS forced southern states to get their stuff together and desegregate. I need to research more in this area, but I think it’s the closest example we have to look at.

I also think this will take a few years to resolve, but once finally resolved we’ll no longer have to worry about our rights being infringed.

Our progress so far, which has also taken years:
The 2A protects guns inside the home (Heller).
The 2A applies to the states as well as the federal government (McDonald).
The 2A protects guns outside of the home and a definitive test for handling 2A cases (Bruen).

Here’s a local example of defiance of Brown v. Board of Ed. nearly two decades later.

Prince George's County Board of Education, 1955-1976 | Archival Collections

 

[Alea Jacta Est]

Phat phony phuck …phooey

that fella needs to leave the USA…oh, Cali is his home. My bad. He’s already not an American.

where do these folks get off? Wherever it is, it can’t happen soon enough

 

[RCH]

At this point, the dems are going all out. They know that they have no chance after the November elections. Their true game plan is to pass as much garbage into "law" as they can, and then drag it out for years in the court systems.

 

[lazarus]

can‘t be that. ny state passed all that bs in a week or less… so, no slowdown there… and that’s my point. Stuff like that , or delawares recent bs.. will be there for… months?years?decade? And cost lots of money to challenge… and time!!!! all while blatantly ignoring scotus and their lawfully owning citizens..

don’t mean to rant at you. But one county official ignored scotus and doesn’t issue a gay marriage license, bam! She’s in jail. within a few days. Hawaii sat on tasers for 6!!!! Years!

Give it a little time. When does DE's new laws go into effect? I thought it was this fall. NY's is September (1st? Later in the month of September?)

The courts are almost certainly going to be more likely to issue preliminary injunctions, but THT is brand new to them. But you can already see one Obama appointee out in Colorado slapping a preliminary injunction on a Colorado town for an AWB.

I will say that again, an OBAMA appointee.

The key to injunctions is that they happen before the law is allowed to go in to affect. Ideally it would happen the day after a law is passed, but it takes (generally) days to a few weeks to write the language for a good preliminary filing for a lawsuit as well as request for preliminary injunction. Then it takes usually days for a judge to rule (at best). Of course, the more the immediacy, the faster lawyers tend to want to put together the suit and injunction request and judges to rule on it.

For cases that implicate core rights, which Thomas just said the 2A IS, courts generally will issue injunctions unless the suit is so poorly constructed that the judge looks at it and laughs "a 2nd grader could have written this, you've got no chance in court". Or have a serious agenda. Even on the latter case and sometimes on the former, they'll grant temporary injunctions so that the plaintiffs can refile/amend their suit or appeal the district court's ruling. Again, if something implicates a court right.

In the past, the courts have treated the 2nd as a disfavored right in part because they HAVE generally refused to do any of that, no matter what the gun rights case was or how awful the law passed was. The state said, "public safety" and the courts got out the knee pads.

Anyway, as far as I can tell, the new awful cases have a few more weeks before they go in to affect. I'll be surprised if the district courts won't issue preliminary injunctions and the appeals courts are likely to if the district courts won't.

Yes, litigation MAY still take years and be expensive. The states/counties/cities are going to be on the hook for costs if the plaintiffs prevail. But the win is getting injunctions before laws go in to affect. For ones that have been out there I think judges are going to be reluctant to hand down injunctions. But new draconian laws? I think they will hit the big red pause button after Bruen.

 

[TheLizardKing]

Every day Joe McCarthy is further vindicated. He tried to warn us, we should have listened