Why are all these cases about “self-defense”?
B.L.U.F. What was supposed to be a short article regarding why we see “self-defense” in so many challenges turned into a 5000-word article covering the opening statements of the NFA hearings in 1934 plus random musings on yelling fire and other historical legal stuff.
If you get anything out of this, please at least click the like button. I’m having trouble justifying to myself the effort I’m putting into these articles.
—it’s just Boris, Are the courts balanced in amicus curiae?, Gun Free Zone, (last visited Jun. 25, 2023)
Boris, you are correct. I agree that it is extremely irritating to hear, over and over again, that our rights are dependent on “self-defense” or being a member of the militia or “sporting purposes” and on and on and on.
This is a stepping stone. It took us a long time to get back to this level of Second Amendment protected rights.
Consider the testimony in Congress over the National Firearms Act.
Read More