Arms and the Law

From the Supreme Court docket, a minute ago: "ARGUMENT SET FOR Wednesday, November 3, 2021."

Update: I say "Whoever," because by the Federal Rules, an official named in his official capacity changes when he is replaced, so Smith v. Jones becomes Smith v. Lagune if Smith retires, the NY post named here as lead defendant/appellee/petition has turned over several times, and it's hard to keep track!

From the federal District Court, District of Connecticut. Driver stopped, hands over his driver's license and permit to carry, informs officer that he had a gun and a permit. He winds up handcuffed, the officer gets carried away, and he sues. Motion to dismiss denied.

"In light of the uncontested fact that Plaintiff presented his pistol permit to Defendant before or at the time he disclosed that he was in possession of a pistol and the absence of any other indicia that Plaintiff was otherwise violating the statute, no reasonable officer could believe probable cause was present. Any contrary holding "would eviscerate Fourth Amendment protections for lawfully armed individuals" by presuming a license expressly permitting possession of a firearm was invalid. United States v. Black, 707 F.3d 531 (4th Cir. 2013) (holding that an individual openly carrying a firearm, even when in a high-crime area...."

One gun homicide the mass media seems to be ignoring... But Judicial Watch is getting the documents. It seems that her husband was notified at 3"45 PM on January 8, and the DC Medical Examiner ordered her body cremated, which was done sometime before 7:13 PM the same day. The document is p. 372 of the linked pdf, The name and all information about the person requesting cremation are redacted, but at 7:13 the "Transaction was completed successfully."

Rochester, NY, mayor Lovely Warren has been indicted on gun charges, not long after her husband was busted for drug and gun violations.

More detail on her husband's arrest here. He was busted with $60,000 in cocaine, $100,000 in cash. In their home, police found three unregistered handguns and a banned "assault rifle." The mayor's excuse was that she knew nothing of what her husband was doing. Sure....

The other day a friend and I were discussing foreign cyberattacks and probes that appeared to be, if not government-launched, at least made with government protection and immunity. Prominent among these being Russian and Chinese hacking.

My friend suggested an imaginative use of letters of marque and reprisal, as authorized by the Constitution. These were the basis of privateering, perhaps the ultimate in privatization. The government would authorize the captain of a civilian vessel to seize enemy shipping, and sell it for his own profit. The letters ensured that if he was captured, he would be treated as a POW rather than as a pirate. A factor in ending the War of 1812 was that, while the US Navy was far too small to have an impact, American privateers (far outnumbering the Royal Navy) were inflicting great pain upon British merchant shipping.

The idea could be implemented along these lines: the US announces that unless a given country stops the cyber-raiding, the US will proclaim that the country is fair game for all American hackers and crackers. Do whatever you want, with no worries about prosecution. If you get any economic benefit, it's yours. If you find any secrets, sell them (we get dibs on military and statecraft secrets, but you sell them to anyone else, too).

In response to a petition signed by 100,000 people, the Czech Republic has adopted a constitutional guarantee of the right to arms.

Radio Prague has has more. And a story about the arms amnesty going on, which allows people to turn in illegally-held guns, and get them back after they get their license. Among the arms turned in was a T-34 tank and an SU-100 tank destroyer!

In NYSRPA, a group of public defenders just filed this amicus. I cannot find words to describe it. You don't need to know 2A law or Supreme Court standards to feel its impact. It's "Why We Fight" in brief form. The NY gun law is a stupid law, stupidly and zealously applied, so as to destroy good people's lives. Implicit message: if you feel compunction about striking it down, don't. You'll be doing humanity a favor.

Just reading the table of contents is enough to sway a reader.

The Court's docket is here; skim down to nearly the end for today's filings.

The brief that I filed is here. I'm too tired to add more, but arguments I and II are the most important. Yes, "bear arms" was understood to mean "carry weapons," if you were writing a constitutional amendment.

Constitutional carry won't become law there for a while. While both houses passed it with "veto-proof" majorities, several senators switched sides.

His newest paper is here. An imaginative title: "Faux History of the Right to Bear Arms: Young v. Hawaii."

Gunman, likely out for mass killing, murders a stranger at a gas pump, fires on a second, and approaches a third. The third is an undercover deputy, who kills the murderer with one shot.

Opinion here. It starts, "When do constitutional rights vest? At 18 or 21? 16 or 25? Why not 13 or 33? In the law, a line must sometimes be drawn. But there must be a reason why constitutional rights cannot be enjoyed until a certain age. Our nation's most cherished constitutional rights vest no later than 18. And the Second Amendment's right to keep and bear arms is no different."

Is here. Filed today, Amicus briefs in support are due July 20.

Henry Ward Beecher (1813-1887), brother of Harriet Beecher Stowe, was a Congregationalist clergyman and a prominent abolitionist. He and his church shipped so many Sharps rifles to anti-slavery settlers in Kansas that the Sharp rifles became known as "Beecher's bibles" and his church as the "Church of the Holy Rifle."

He was a rifleman, no doubt. I own his copy of Cadamus Wilcox's book, Rifles and Rifle Practice." I just located a book he coauthored, a sort of spiritual self-help book, "Life Thoughts" (1858). In it he reflect, "True aiming, in life, is like true aiming in marksmanship. We always look at the fore-sight of a rifle through the hind-sight."

I.e., the AR-15 platform, at Federalist Society Review.

In hyper-woke Oakland, a camera crew interviews the city's chief of violence protection on the steps of city hall.... and gets mugged during the interview.

Here's the amicus brief I just filed, for Firearms Policy Coalition and Firearms Policy Foundation, supporting the petitioner. At this stage, you aren't trying to persuade the Court that the good guy should win, you're trying to persuade it that it should take the case (it takes about 70-80 cases per year out of maybe 10,000 petitioners, I haven't checked the recent numbers). The best argument for it taking a case is that the lower courts have split on an issue or issues. One law applies in part of the country, another in another, the Court must resolve the question. In the case of the 2A, there are a LOT of splits!!

Story here.

Right here. About halfway down the page.

Let's get this straight. (1) Resistance if Futile unless you have nukes and air support, but (2) a bunch of people entered the Capitol, without so much as BB guns, and this posed an existential crisis to the Republic?

Nearly 40 million background checks in 2020. A check of course isn't exactly equal to a gun sale, let along a new gun sale, but it should give an idea of an enormous market. I can recall back in the 70s that guns were being produced and sold at about 3 million a year, increasing slowly to six million decades later. Those enormous sales are driving much of the ammo shortage, from what I hear.