On March 9, 2021, the case was docketed coming out of the District Court, District of Maryland. The district court had dismissed their case because [The] plaintiffs acknowledged in their Complaint that Plaintiffs’ theory of liability is foreclosed by the Forth Circuit’s opinion deciding Kolbe v. Hogan 849 F.3d 114 (4th Cir. 2017), and indeed, Plaintiffs’ suit seems to have no grounding in law. — Bianchi v. Frosh, 1:20-cv-03495, (D. Maryland, Mar 04, 2021) ECF No. 28.

In other words, Bianchi brought the suit explicitly to challenge Kolbe, they knew the case would be dismissed by district court, but it was a hoop they had to jump through.

On September 17, 2021, the Fourth Circuit affirmed the inferior court’s order dismissing the case. This was to be expected: As Plaintiffs concede, however, their argument is squarely foreclosed by this court’s decision in Kolbe v. Hogan, 849 F.3d 114 (4th Cir. 2017) (en banc). — Dominic Bianchi v. Anthony G. Brown, 21-1255, (4th Cir. Oct 12, 2021) ECF No. 26.

The three judge panel stated that they were not authorized to reconsider an en banc holding. Normally, we would expect a request to hear the case en banc, but the plaintiffs (good guys), know that the Fourth Circuit is going to agree with the state.

They have no interest in getting another negative holding from the Circuit Court, this was just another hoop.

Because, on December 20, 2021, the plaintiffs filed a petition for writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court.

And then the Supreme Court just sat on the case. It was one of the cases that was stuck pending a grant of certiorari on Second Amendment challenges.

Instead of Bianchi v. Frosh, the Supreme Court heard Bruen and issued their opinion in June.

On June 30, 2022, just days after the Bruen opinion, this case was also granted certiorari.

That same day, the Supreme Court issued their holdings on Bianchi v. Frosh. The judgment of the [Fourth Circuit] court in this cause is vacated with costs, and the case is remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit for further consideration in light of New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc. v. Bruen, 597 U.S. ___ (2022).

The short translation: “You done messed up, fix it right, dumb asses.”

At this point, the Fourth Circuit had a couple of choices, they could do the same thing that the Ninth Circuit court did and kick the can down the road by tossing it in the lap of the district court. This would have actually delayed the case considerably more than Duncan v. Bonta because the case was not actually argued at the district court level.

They did not kick it down the road. Instead, they took it up, they allowed the state and plaintiffs to file briefs in light of Bruen, then heard the case on December 6, 2022.

For an anti-gun circuit court, this case was moving at light speed. Oral arguments were heard on the 6th of December.

And then radio silence. NOTHING. For a year and a month, complete silence out of the Fourth Circuit court.

During that same time, Judge Benitez heard new arguments in Duncan v. Bonta. He let that state throw everything plus the neighbors’ kitchen sink at the case. Then he told the state to whittle it down to only 100 best matching regulations.

He heard other cases and issued his order in Duncan, “It is still unconstitutional, you morons.”

The Ninth Circuit court then went into overdrive to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat. They claimed that it was a comeback, took the case en banc, and had oral arguments scheduled.

Today, the Fourth Circuit court caught up with the Ninth. Without issuing their opinion, the three judge panel has had the case moved to an en banc rehearing.

This means that a majority of the judges in regular active service on the Fourth Circuit voted to grant the rehearing.

IANAL, this is actually a good thing for The People.

If the three judge panel had ruled for The People, this would mean that a majority of the court was unwilling to accept The People winning. It will require a massive act of defiance for the inferior Circuit Court to rule that Kolbe is still good law. This means that they have to find a different way of allowing the infringement to continue.

Regardless, this puts it all out in the open. And the case can go to the Supreme Court.

If the three judge panel ruled for the state, this would mean that the majority of the court was for the Constitution and The People. They will then issue a favorable ruling. The state can appeal to the Supreme Court, but the Supreme Court can simply deny certiorari and The People win, and the Supreme Court has told the rest of the inferior courts that the Second Amendment means what it says.

The other possibility is that someone on the Fourth Circuit doesn’t want this to go around in circles, again. So even though they agree with the opinion that was to issue, they want to put the stamp of the entire en banc panel on the case.

It appears to be unusual for a case to be taken en banc without the opinion of the three judge panel being published, but we saw something similar happen in the Eleventh Circuit court where the three judge panel decided that 18,19, and 20 year-olds are not part of The People.

It feels like I’ve been a bit light on postings this week. On the other hand, I’ve been busy as heck. I guess it balances out.

I’m still doing the ESL classes. At the last company meeting, about 30% of the people taking the classes mentioned that it was very helpful for them.

I also found out that even my half ass work is beyond most peoples expectations. The last company meeting was goal reviews for 2023 and goals for 2024. I was told to have my 5 goals in to the meeting leader by EOD on Monday. I whipped off a 10-slide presentation and handed it to her.

And I was called first, so popped up my slide show in OBS, ran the slides in 5 minutes, which is very fast. My mentor said to plan on 60 seconds per slide. I’ve held to that since he told me. I was running fast this time, so 30 second per slide.

I even mentioned the Casinator as an end from the goal of learning FreeCAD.

If the world treats me well tomorrow, I will have time in the shop to start building. If I get the faceplate, drive pulley, and cutter holder completed, I will actually have something running.

What is a goal for you for 2024? Is it to read a book? Learn a skill, lose weight?

Please let us know in the comments.

I spend far too much time thinking about communication. The words we pick have meaning, connotation, and implicit context.

Consider the following phrases: I did well in my maths. It bit me in the arse. When I was at University.

All three phrases are phrases from the UK. They imply something.

When I say “the state argued …”, I am choosing not to use the word “government”. “The State” has different connotations than “the government”. It helps to communicate.

One of my friends truly believes I spent time with an unnamed three letter agency doing “that sort of work”. I didn’t.

No matter how many times I tell him, “no”, he doesn’t believe me. Why does he believe this? My knowledge about things he knows are not commonly known, and a quiet competence in certain areas, along with a vocabulary taken from spending time around the military messes with his brain.

The only way he can make it all fit is to put me in the box labeled “spook”.

The media knows this, they understand it, better than we do, in general. And they use it to tell a narrative that they want to tell.

NBC did a piece on PregerU. It turned into a hit piece. Dennis and Marissa go through the broadcast and show how words were twisted.

It is a long video, but well worth watching

Regardless of what tools you use to reload, you will end up with some reloaded cartridges. Hopefully, you didn’t make any major mistakes along the way.

It is now time to inspect, test, and store.

For me, I do initial testing of my loads. Generally, that is 5 per test. I change exactly one thing between tests. Once I identify a successful load, I stick with it.

So what are my variables?

The biggest and easiest to change is the charge weight. Again, in general, if you are following a recipe from your reloading bible(s), you will get acceptable results. For each test group, is fired from a firearm I know and understand. The fact that rounds out of the CETME don’t go where I expect nor do they group is not data. Five rounds out of the Remington 700 is meaningful.

Besides group size, I also record velocity.

If I am satisfied, I am likely to stop there. I am more interested in shooting than in reloading.

If I am not satisfied, I will adjust the load.

Because I have that test range close by, I can take my five shots, go and reload another 5 with a different charge, and then try again.

If I need longer ranges, I will load up a sequence of charges. Five rounds with each charge weight, carefully labeled.

The next variable that can be changed is seating depth. Go ask somebody else about how it affects accuracy and speed. I follow the bible’s value, as closely as I can.

Next comes the actual powder. I am more likely to change powder because of availability than because of performance. Every time I use a new powder, I do the same set of tests.

The most important aspect of all of this is to record your observations. If you are not recording your observations, then you are just guessing. And you get to do it all over again the next time.

Next comes bullets. You can try changing the weight, style, or type of bullet you are using. All will change the results you get. Each change of bullet requires working up a load.

For me, I will often work up a load with a cheaper bullet, replace that bullet with a bullet of similar flight characteristics and the same weight. Then my starting point will be the same charge/powder that I used with the cheaper bullet.

It is worthwhile to have worked up loads for different needs. I have loads for 5.56×45 using FMJBT, and name brand hunting bullets. I have .45ACP with coated cast bullets, FMJ bullets, copper plated bullets, and JHP bullets. I’ve stopped buying copper plated and FMJ bullets. I have plenty, when the plated runs out, I do not expect to buy more. When the FMJ runs out, it is unlikely I will buy more.

But what happens when you have worked up all your loads? It is time to make and store your rounds.

However, you store your ammo, you need to be able to identify it easily and rapidly. You should also be able to look up what the recipe you used was.

Bulk Storage

When I purchased my first AR15 style weapon, I purchased 2000 rounds of surplus 5.56×45 ammo to go with it. The ammo came packed in a wooden box. Inside were 100 boxes, each holding 20 rounds. That box, when full, was HEAVY. But it was easy to move, easy to find, easy to open. It was what I needed.

Today I use ammo cans. I have metal cans, but mostly I’ve switched to plastic cans. The plastic might not be as sturdy as the metal cans, but they are more than sturdy enough.

If you don’t really care, then you can store your ammo in an ammo can as is. By that, I mean just loose in the can.

The last time I bought bulk 5.56×45, it came in a mini plastic ammo can. No boxes, nothing but rounds of ammo in a small ammo can.

This does not work for me in the long run. It is too easy to dump out and make a mess, or to lose track of how many rounds remain.

Boxing

That is where Repackbox comes into play. Not only do they organize your ammo into boxes, they do it compactly. A box of .45 ACP is 50 rounds and takes up about 1/3 the space as a box of .45 ACP from Federal. That is because there is no holder.

Each caliber box comes with packing instructions for 30 cal cans and 50 cal cans. Somebody has done the work for you to figure out the most compact way to store your ammo boxes.

Much of my ammo is stored like this. Each box has a label on it telling me the recipe I used for the ammo in the box. That recipe includes bullet type as well.

Stripper Clips

For many of my rifles, they have stripper clips. Some stripper clips are designed to strip directly into the rifle, others strip into a magazine.

My bulk purchase of 30-06 came loose in a 30 cal metal ammo can. Most of that ammo was placed in enblocks, the enblocks were then placed in ammo belts and bandoleers. The remaining loose rounds went into boxes.

The other WWII rifles all have stripper clips loaded for them. The rest went into boxes and from there into ammo cans.

For the 5.56×45 and 7.62×39, those go onto stripper clips. The 5.56×45 on strips then go into cardboard sleeves, and from there into ammo cans. Each ammo sleeve holds 3 stripper clips of 10 rounds each for a total of 30 rounds. Ready to be stripped into magazines.

I don’t have sleeves for the 7.62×39, it is on the list of things I want to get.

Magazines

I don’t know how many magazines you have for your firearms, but I don’t have enough.

Define enough? More than I currently have.

If I have too many magazines, I get more ammo, then I don’t have enough magazines.

Reality check, some firearm magazines are lower cost than others.

For the Glock and the PC-9 I have 10 magazines, I think. They are ready magazines. They are in the carry bag for the PC-9, along with the holster and belt for the Glock. Which reminds me, I need to add a set of load bearing suspenders to that kit bag.

Again, I don’t know how many magazines I have for the 1911s, but not enough. My standard load out is two spare magazines on my weak side, one in the pistol, then extras in the bags.

I need to update my load bearing gear. Each of the AR platforms has its own LBV rig. Each rig carries 6 magazines. Each rig also has an IFAK. I’m going to upgrade that with pistol holsters. For my primaries, that will be 1911 specific holster and magazine pouches. For the other rigs, it will be Glock or HK holsters.

Crates

All the ammo cans that I currently have reside in “crates”. Each crate holds 3 50 cal cans or 4 30 cal cans.

Since the crates stack, there is madness to my method. The bottom rows are 50 cal cans. Each crate is dedicated to a specific caliber or grouping of calibers. Most of it is over flow.

In the top row are ready cans. These are cans that are partially full of boxes of ammo, ready for use. One can per caliber in this row. If I need to, I’ll dig down to the lower tiers to get a full can, then refill the empty can from reloading.

Temporary/Ready Storage

The last storage method is those cute ammo boxes that hold a few rounds for range day. I have a number of MTM Flip-Top boxes. I normally pick up 200 rounds worth of these boxes for range ready rounds. Or for ready storage.

For example, when I take out a trash panda, the rifle gets topped off from one of these plastic boxes. If the box looks to be a little low, it gets more added from the ammo storage.

I also bought a 50 cal can with 7 100 round 45 ACP boxes in it. I.e., a 50 cal can that I can lug to the range, but I only take out 100 rounds at a time. The next time I reload .45 ACP, I’ll top off all the boxes, but it really wasn’t a good purchase. Today I would invest in repackbox and just regular cans.

Long-Term Storage

You need to have ammo that is difficult to get to and even more difficult to find.

If you have ever heard of a place to stash something, it is known to both the good guys and the bad guys.

I remember somebody explaining how if you really wanted to hide something, hide it in a wall. To achieve this, you remove the entire sheet rock panel. You put your stuff in the wall. You then hang new sheetrock, tape it, mud it, prime it, paint the entire room.

If you need access, you will have to destroy the wall to get it out.

Are you thinking of storing it in someplace gross and disgusting? That’s what rookies and cherries are for.

Ground penetrating radar can be used in homes, so can magnetometers.

We’ve talked about stashes in other articles. You can make a stash, or you can just store your ammo in more than one place.

I leave you with this clip from a famous movie. In it, the people have just been driven from their homes. Some have stayed behind, in hiding. The bad guys have already cleared this area multiple times in the past. They knew exactly what they were doing. They know all the hiding places, they know how to search, and they have the time to search.

Here’s a blast from the past! I hope you enjoy it.

Warning, high quality headphones should be used.

B.L.U.F.
The babblings of a not lawyer about just how good a weekend order from the Ninth Circuit was for The People.
(1500 words)

There is a name that should be familiar to us, but which is not, Federal Judge Jack Weinstein. He sat on the Eastern District of New York district court from 1967 until 2020.

Why is he important? He was the federal judge that oversaw a number of mass tort cases. The one of interest to us, in the Second Amendment community, is the cases involving Diethylstilbestrol, or DES.

DES was prescribed to pregnant woman to reduce the risk of complications from 1940 through the early 1970s.

It turned out that it caused significant medical complications.

Of course, being America, once it was determined that there was an injury and that somebody might be at fault, lawsuits were filed.

But here is the thing, every pharmaceutical company made DES. Each of the pills was the same. It was almost impossible to tell the manufacture of a DES pill.

More than that, most people just don’t know. When I look at my medication bottles, there is no indication of who manufactured that particular lot of pills. I can go to my pharmacist and find out. On the other hand, I would have a difficult time finding out who manufactured the pills I took when I lived in Maryland. I’m not even sure what pharmacy I used, at that time.

This is where Judge Weinstein comes in. His name was pulled as the judge to hear the first suit filed in the eastern district of New York. From the start, it looked like he was sympathetic to the plaintiffs, the people suing. More suits were opened in the Eastern District.

Instead of a judge being drawn at random, the plaintiffs would request that their case be handled by Judge Weinstein. For judicial expectancy, these requests were granted. This is normally a good thing. This is what happened in California when Judge Benitez was the judge to hear so many Second Amendment challenges.

The defendants stood up in court and said, “Hey, it wasn’t me, and they can’t prove it was me. Dismiss me from the suit.”.

This is because no plaintiff could point to any particular defendant and prove that the defendant in question was the company that manufactured the pills that the defendant took. Since there was no way of figuring out which defendant was responsible for which plaintiff, it looked like the cases would be dismissed.

Judge Weinstein reviewed this and came up with a plan. His plan was a type of joint responsibility. He reasoned that for any particular year, each defendant held a particular market share. Company A held 50%, company B held 25%, company C held 15%, and D, E, and F held the remaining 10%. His ruling was that each company was responsible for a portion of the fine based on their market share.

Thus, for every $100 award, company A paid $50, company B paid $25 and so on.

But how did this intersect with the Second Amendment?

It turns out that Judge Weinstein was a rabid anti-gun person. There wasn’t a thing about guns he approved of, unless it was protecting his sorry arse.

The anti-gunners were not winning in the courts in ways to completely ban guns, but they reasoned that they could “get rid of guns” if there were no more sellers or manufacturers of guns. To this end, they started suing gun manufacturers and sellers.

And they filed in the Eastern District of New York. And they requested that the cases be assigned to Judge Weinstein because these gun suits were just like the lawsuits filed in the DES cases. Judge Weinstein gleefully accepted these cases.

Even if the defendants (good guys), won the suits, the costs of litigation were so high it drove smaller companies out of business.

This ended with Congress passing several bills to stop it, the current version is the PLCAA.

Lawfare

Read More

On December 20, 2023, District Court Judge Cormac J. Carney of the Southern District of California granted the plaintiffs (good guys) motion for a preliminary injunction.

This enjoined (stopped) the state of California from enforcing California Senate Bill 2. This was the “every place is sensitive, no guns allowed” bill.

Quoting Judge Carney, . SB2’s coverage is sweeping, repugnant to the Second Amendment, and openly defiant of the Supreme Court. Reno May v. Robert Bonta, 8:23-cv-01696, (C.D. Cal. Dec 20, 2023) ECF No. 45.

Of course, the state started whining like a little baby when their infringement was slapped down. They went running to the Ninth Circuit to get an emergency stay.

The only surprise in this was that it took the state two whole days to file for the emergency stay.

While waiting for the emergency administrative panel to give their order, The People of California, lucky enough to have a CCW, could carry in all the places they use to be able to carry.

On December 30, 2023, Judges Johnnie B. RAWLINSON, Jay S. BYBEE, and Andrew D. HURWITZ granted the stay. This meant that on January 1st, 2024, The People of California could no longer carry. It was impossible, or nearly so, to carry with a CCW without violating a sensitive place restriction.

We do not know whether this was a three to zero ruling or a two to one ruling.

There were no more filings after the December 30th order. But the plaintiffs must have been working hard, behind the scenes. How do we know that? Because yesterday afternoon, the 6th of January, the stay was dissolved. At least one judge on the Ninth Circuit had the gonads to stand up for The People.

All the filings have been forwarded to the merits panel.

The case is going to be heard on the merits? Wow?

What is even more amazing is that it will be heard in April. To put this in perspective:

Punch it Chewy!