Arms and the Law

Nation Devastated As Congress Resumes Functioning. Well, we had a few days of peace.

Houston police ask customer who shot robber to come forward. I'm sure the victims who saw him will be unable to describe him well, so why volunteer?

Its response in the Supreme Court, in that case where the Court may be looking to rebuke both New York and the Second Circuit. It'd be a good response if this were the ordinary appeal, which it is not.

Mark Smith makes an interesting point, worth any 2A litigator's memorizing.

One of the tests mentioned in Heller, which took it from Miller, is whether the firearm at issue is one that is in "common use." (I disagree with this test, BTW. Miller just mentioned in passing that the early militia was expected to turn out with the firearms in common use at the time. That's a statement of historical fact, not a legal test. As a test, it turns circular -- if an arm is tightly restricted from its early history, it'll never be in common use).

Smith points out that in ATF's rule making on receivers, the agency states that the AR-15 is one of the most popular guns in America. Yes, that may be very useful in court.

His review of the decision striking down the NY ban on guns in churches, even if the church in question is good with that.

Has New York officially pissed off the Supreme Court?

Short version: right after Bruen, NY passed a law imposing even more onerous restrictions on carry. GOA challenged it, and the trial court ruled in their favor and issued a temporary restraining order against enforcing many portions of the statute.

NY appealed to the 2nd Circuit, which set aside the TRO (this is quite unusual; appellate courts don't like to get involved with TROs, they want to hear appeals from final judgements rather than preliminary orders).

GOA appealed to the US Supreme Court (which is even less likely than a Circuit to get involved in a TRO), and the Supreme Court ordered NY to show cause by Januryar 3 why the Supremes shouldn't overrule the 2nd Circuit.

I agree with his view: this can only mean the Supreme Court is seriously POed at NY, and willing to jump in, on something it would almost certainly turn down, to tell NY and the 2nd Circuit that the Justices have their eyes on them and are willing to slap them down NOW, not at the end of a 2 year appellate process.

This is one of Stephen Stamboulieh's cases.... he's already made his mark as a 2A litigator, and has a lot of energy!

Alabama and Georgia will allow permit-less concealed carry in 2023. I'd bet it'll have the same effect as going permit-less did here in Arizona, which is not much. Anyone who wanted to carry concealed was already doing so (with or without a permit). Those who had permits kept on renewing them, for reciprocity or for ease of purchase at gun shows.

Right here. Read it all, this is great material, probably best I've seen on the topic.

Today is it, and it brought a memory to mind. I wasn't in DC at the bicentennial of the Constitution, but I knew it was a big affair. A committee headed by the Chief Justice to organize it, celebrations, a huge parade with entries from all over the country, etc.

I was in DC for the bicentennial of the Bill of Rights, in 1991. I had expected something big... but it was nothing.

Then it occurred to me--DC is a company town, and the company is the federal government. If it wasn't for that, DC would be a small backwater port town, far out-shadowed by the better port at Baltimore. The Constitution created and empowered the federal government. The Bill of Rights restrained it. It is understandable that for the government, the Constitution is greatly to be celebrated, while the Bill of Rights is a minor thing indeed.

The Reload reports on the results of a Freedom of Information Act request. CDC originally had released a list of studies claiming that the annual number of defensive gun uses was anywhere from 60,000 to 2.5 million, the latter being the finding of Gary Kleck, after a very detailed and well-designed survey. But antigun organizations asked CDC to delete references to the Kleck study ("[T]hat 2.5 Million number needs to be killed, buried, dug up, killed again and buried again.") and the CDC complied.

Here's another tidbit: the CDC actually asked about defensive gun use in several surveys, but after the data was collected, confirming Klick's estimate of 2.5 million, decided to say nothing about it.

"repeatedly debunked?" If that refers to Hemmenway's article criticizing it, Kleck in reply took him apart. It was as complete a demolition of an academic article as I have ever seen.

Opinion here. It doesn't get down to the issue until p. 25. The judge sounds skeptical with regards Bruen.

His op-ed here. Since the author is a law prof, with experience in security, his opinion may carry some special weight.

New York's expanded "sensitive places" carrying prohibition: SAF and FPC blocked that with a preliminary injunction. The state has moved for a stay pending appeal, and they have opposed that.

SAF and FPC also challenged California's legislation making anyone challenging a gun law liable for attorney's fees if the government wins (while not making the government subject to fees if it loses), and the California AG declined to defend the law.

Gun Owners of America has brought so many challenges, and is winning in so many, that I'll just give a link here to their list. I should give specific mention to their challenge to Oregon's recent and repressive laws, on which they won a temporary restraining order, the state took an emergency appeal to the state Supreme Court, and the state failed.

All these are preliminary rulings, but the direction of the tide is clear.

Newly-elected Congressman turned down for DC apartment due to his bad credit rating.

Some interesting thoughts. I've often encountered that in the past. At the local college of law, I once looked up faculty voting registrations. Out of 30 or so that I found, there was only one Repub, a new hire. And of course if you bring up the Second Amendment, the reaction is echhh...

Haven't been blogging because last week I had a complex case. And in the coming week I'm summoned for jury duty, and won't be able to talk about that until the trial is over. I noticed something amusing, though. Arizona has mandatory, repeat mandatory, retirement for judges at age 70. But jurors must serve up to age 75.

He says, ""The idea we still allow semi-automatic weapons to be purchased is sick. Just sick," he said. "It has no, no social redeeming value. Zero.""

update; no idea why the comment was blocked, but I've cleared it.

A few useful facts.

It turns out that, not long before, the killer had threatened his mother with a bomb, causing the evacuation of a neighborhood. Yet he somehow was not arrested. As The Truth About Guns asks, what does it take to get arrested in Colorado Springs? Or, for that matter, to get a psychiatric commitment, which, like a felony conviction, would have barred him from legal firearms ownership?

At SSRN. He finds that, despite 24 states having gone to permit-less concealed carry, the number of CCW licenses continues to expand.(He doesn't count Alabama, since it will only go permit-less on January 1).

Outside of California and New York, 10% of the adult population now has a permit. Even 4.5% of Illinois has one.

(I haven't been blogging much due to workload, catching covid, and having a relapse. Fortunately it was the most modern strain, about like a cold, but it really did drain my energy).

Video here. With Steve are professors William Merkel and Mark Smith.