B.L.U.F.
In reading some recent filings, I came across this excellent take down of the Second Circuit Court’s opinion.
(1550 words)

The following is mostly from plaintiffs (good guys) in Kipke v. Moore in the District Court of Maryland. As mentioned the other day, the state is using the opinion out of the Second Circuit to bolster their arguments. The plaintiffs are having none of it.

NRA v. Bondi was the case down in Florida where the 3 judge panel found that 18, 19, and 20-year-olds were not part of “The People”. They published their opinion. Their opinion was immediately stayed by another judge on the Eleventh Circuit court. The case was then taken up en banc.

We are waiting for the en banc panel to issue their opinion.

Citing to NRA v. Bondi as good case law is a profound error. It is no different than citing to —Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 US 393 (Supreme Court 1857) to support a current regulation. (Dred Scott was an awful Supreme Court opinion that has been corrected by the Supreme Court.)

The Circuit Courts like to think of themselves as Supreme Courts. Even if the Supreme Court has told the Article III inferior courts how to do something, the Circuit Courts, which are inferior courts, will hold on to their past opinions with a stranglehold.

The Forth Circuit court should have had an easy task when asked if Kolbe is still good law. The Supreme Court just GVRed a case to the Fourth, telling them that using Kolbe they got it wrong. Yes, Kolbe is part of the dung heap of the past.

Depending on decisions, pre-dating Bruen is wrong. The problem that these rogue courts have, is that they don’t have any ground to stand on. Every time they think they are on firm ground, it turns to quicksand. They knew they were infringing when they used the means-end tests. They knew they were ignoring what the Supreme Court wanted. They were more concerned with their agenda.

In —Mcdonald V. Chicago, 177 L. Ed. 2d 894 (2010), the Supreme Court clearly stated that the Second Amendment is incorporated. That it applies to the states as well as the Federal government. For the Second Circuit to say that state law is somehow different is an abuse of their authority.
Read More

There are numerous cases that are bouncing closer and closer to the Supreme Court. The readers of the tea leaves all agree, the Supreme Court is going to static.

There are people who have spent decades observing the Supreme Court, attempting to predict what they will do in any particular situation. Some of them have great track records, some reaching as high as 50%!

Cases exist in different “states”. Everything before final judgement is interlocutory. This means that the case hasn’t reached a conclusion at this level.

The current spat of infringements being challenged are all in that interlocutory state. The Supreme Court doesn’t normally act on cases that are still interlocutory. They much prefer everything done and ready for them to give an opinion that is going to stick.

So don’t worry when you see the Supreme Court hasn’t done something.

The reloading series is nearing an end, I have a few more articles to write in that series.

If you think there is something I’m missing, please let me know in the comments. I might have it queued up for an article already, or I might have missed it.

For those of you that do progressive reloading, yes, I know it is the cat’s meow. I might touch on it, but I’ve never used a progressive press. I’m not the right person to write that article.

As always, feel free to give us your thoughts in the comments below.

Have a great weekend!

I got a package delivered at four in the morning.

I am guessing it has to do with the Holiday rush, but an unknow car coming in a driveway in the boonies at that hour can get the residents a mite excited.

Then again, not breaking perimeter till I was damned sure nobody was trying to set me up was the way to go.

And yes, I was armed.

As somebody once said, “In God We Trust, everybody else keep your hands where I can see them.”

We have some bad news. The case which was put on the Supreme Court’s emergency docket asking for a writ of injunction has been denied.

The total information we have currently is:
Dec 14 2023 Application (23A486) referred to the Court.
Application (23A486) for a writ of injunction pending certiorari presented to Justice Barrett and by her referred to the Court is denied.

A man posed as a UPS driver to gain entry into a home in London.

Before the homeowner could close the door, the ‘ups driver’ and his three accomplices stormed the house.

They slashed the father’s head with a knife and shot his 11 year old son.

They both survived.

The wife and… pic.twitter.com/8visopPFKC

— Amiri King (@AmiriKing) December 13, 2023

We are seeing more and more of these types of attacks.

Having a front door camera is good, but that’s not enough.

Situational awareness and layers of security is important.

Give it five or ten minutes between the delivery and opening the door.

Watch to see that the delivery driver has driven away.

Make sure he was in the proper delivery truck.

A little patience and some forethought will go a long way in keeping you safe.

B.L.U.F.
A quick update regarding some 2A cases kicking around. Touching on how bad case law begets bad case law.
(1200 words)

In June 2022, the Supreme Court issued the Bruen opinion. This case answered one question: Is New York’s “proper cause” requirement for a CCW constitutional?

The Supreme Court answered with a resounding “NO!”.

In dealing with the question, they stated that subjective criteria was not acceptable. They went on to explain how they reached their opinion using text, history, and tradition. In the associated dicta, they told the Article III inferior courts how they should analyze any Second Amendment challenges.

It is important to understand that the Supreme Court gives explicit answers regarding the question they are answering and instructions on how the inferior courts can do it themselves.

When an inferior court says that the Supreme Court hasn’t issued an opinion on something, that is the court being cowardly, ignorant, or attempting to subvert The Constitution.

If the plaintiffs make a Second Amendment challenge, they are responsible for proving that the proposed conduct implicates the plain text of the Second Amendment.

To take just one example, a 16-year-old wishes to purchase a firearm. They are refused because they are underage.

The text of the Second Amendment reads; A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

The state might argue that 16 year-olds are not part of the people for reasons. But this is not the first step.

The plaintiffs wish to purchase a firearm. All firearms are arms. Thus, the “Arms” requirement is met. They wish to purchase, possess arms. This satisfies “to keep and bear arms”.

They are a part of “the people”. That means the plain text of the Second Amendment is implicated.

If the state starts arguing that they are not part of the people protected by the Second Amendment, that is part of the second step: history and tradition.

Anytime the state is arguing that something is not an arm, or it is not being kept, or it isn’t bearing, or they are not part of the people, they are attempting to subvert the clear intentions of the Supreme Court.

Once the plaintiffs have proved that the proposed conduct implicates the plain text of the Second Amendment, the burden shifts to the state. The plaintiffs are done.

In that second stage, the plaintiffs can argue why particular regulations are not analogous, or not of the correct period. That is their job, to eliminate the regulations presented by the state from being considered.

Everything else the state brings up can be challenged as being irrelevant. If an expert is giving an opinion on legal matters, that is inappropriate. The legal experts are the attorneys and the Court, experts give opinions about non-legal issues.

The First Domino

Read More

I read J Kb’s post (Performative goon bullsh*t – Gun Free Zone) and one thing that immediately came to mind is for all the prepper mania, many people fail to carry useful tools. I am referring to something old and simple as a Swiss Army knife or equivalent.

I am sure if you were at a reunion with several of your friends who may be in the same defensive mind range as yours, you would be offered a smattering of knives, folding or fixed from the best brands and reviews. Same reunion, same people and ask for a screwdriver or a corkscrew, and they would be at a loss.

Unless they carry a multi-function knife.

I commented in these pages how I have been carrying a Swiss Army knife since I was 11 years-old and I was given one by a relative.  A S.A.K. has helped from fixing cars. cut food, debride wounds, open packages and in a couple of occasions, modify bad behavior from third parties and all in a nice little package.

And I do have a Leatherman that I carry with me, but just not on me. It is a great complimentary tool, but I use it less and my pockets and belt are already overloaded.

The other reason to carry a multi-function knife id that you will not abuse your expensive tacticool knife doing stuff not designed to do and possibly damaging it. A defensive tool like that must be kept pointy and sharp to change the minds of those who seek to harm you and yours.

Old Fart Rant off.

If you have a favorite multi-function knife, let us know in the comments.

Amazon.com: Victorinox Swiss Army One-Hand Trekker Lockblade Pocket Knife (Black)