I’ve seen and heard all the lame defensive arguments and responses to when Lunch Bucket Joe cries “Ban Assault Weapons!” People just start playing their cards like morons and start defending inarguable positions, like “A semi-automatic rifle fires one bullet with each pull of the trigger”, and they always miss the fact that that is not what the issue is. Well, duh! It has nothing to do with whether or not the rifle is a machine gun, a pistol brace or a stock on a Glock, or even a Blackhawk helicopter. We already saw the defeat of the bumpstock rule, in a case in Texas. Some people went silly enough to argue that that one wasn’t a hill to die on. Every gun restriction, other than a felon who has served his complete sentence, should not even exist.
Because it is not the gun they are really after. It is control over you and I. They plan to keep their guns.
Or rather, it is who is holding the gun, because they want you to be powerless. That means they, who are trying, and succeeding, only want to be the ones in charge of your life, from cradle to grave, and if you have a gun, they can only go so far. 2nd amendment, baby!
A lot of the time, our side chases butterflies, in the public realm, that is, until lately. More assertive people have been addressing issues more effectively because we finally got a Supreme Court who is acting in accordance to the original intent of the Constitution, and we now have a great group of attorneys making great arguments. Our wins have been based on a firm foundation, interpreting the words of the Constitution as it was written, and that is from 1791. It’s either because we are making better arguments, or we are facing such obvious breaches of trust that we are simply much more engaged.
Someone in the gun culture will likely say, one time, that a semi-automatic rifle operates one way, then move on to another argument because that argument is done. The gun grabber will continue to beat it to death by repeating the same thing until you assume it to be true. How we have been beating the gun grabber is by using the law effectively to sue over constitutionality, not sit and argue with idiots and ideologues. They can howl at the moon, for all I care. We sell our product too much. like they sell theirs. Just take it to court and be done with it. Several gun groups have taken the right course, in my opinion, and formulated some very good arguments, and they only had to let the left do their usual overreach to come up with it, and it is lighting up the country, on our side.
West Virginia v EPA is a court decision that says an agency of the federal government used their own means to make laws that regulate commerce in Virginia, that bypassed the process of laws coming from Congress. Unconstitutional! New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen decided that New York’s scheme of “maybe issuing” a person a carry permit was also unconstitutional, because it relied on unusual practices, like using social media to screen applicants, making the entire state a safe zone from guns, and allowing the owners to place signs that exclude you from entering if you carry. The suit was primarily because a couple guys who had carry licenses could only carry their guns to a range, or to hunt, but not for self defense. I’d call a licensing scheme like that insane.
Notice on that last item, that if you are carrying concealed, and you had a permit, how would the store owner know, unless you protected that lowly store owner from a robbery? We don’t walk in with our carry guns for the world to see. That’s just foolish and unnecessary. NYSRPA v Bruen was about how the state of New York wanting to effectively ban classes of firearms, when the 2nd Amendment states, very clearly, the right is not up to much more debate. We are winning.
In the case of the Pistol Brace rule, one that is just funny to think there is an argument over, the ATF(minit mart) is even being caught having to admit their bad actions, and in some case, outright lies. Some have speculated that this battle may just end up as the declaration by the courts that the 1934 act is unconstitutional, which it is. I found out that there are others who are beginning to share my belief about that possibility.
When an agency of the federal government goes and redefines what a law has already defined, and proceeds to change their minds about the legality of something, back and forth, and back and forth, historically, over the last decade, I know they are skating on thin ice. That’s West Virginia v EPA. The ATF said about the introduction of the pistol brace that they are legal many times before they came up with his latest rule making. Objectively, if a product is created to aid a disabled person to be able to control a firearm better, where is there room for the ATF to come along and ban it, especially since they already said it was legal before? There is no room. This came from the same radical left who want to grab your guns. Nothing newsworthy here, same old same old.
Perhaps the Supreme Court, based on their recent rulings, will now view this latest attempt to ban a class of firearms, as the last straw. That could very well be the case. The arguments about the 2nd Amendment have been set in concrete, considering all the words of that amendment have been defined and made to be so indisputable that the only thing left is to disassemble the ATF and the 1934 gun ban. One can only go so far, and the left has gone way too far. The bureaucracy has really taken this issue to an extreme that could be their demise. It should be their demise.
Lawsuits are stacking up, because the ATF has acted like they are gods and can get away with anything, while Justices will be saying “Hold My Beer”, smiling and waiting for the opportunity to strike down this renegade agency of the federal government. I just hope that one of the plaintiff’s attorneys really goes for the jugular, putting the rational argument about all firearms, including machine guns, being necessary for the right of the people of their ability to keep and bear arms. The 2nd Amendment does not exclude any class of arms, for good reason.
We have all this absolute nonsense because of the people in the Lunch Bucket Administration. Merrick Garland, who will do the dastardly deeds set upon him by his moron Fuhrer in the White House. Said Fuhrer, who is surrounded by a bunch of little radicals from all across the fruited plains, who have the presence and personality of Greta Thunberg, at her best, and the ones who come from the Kos Kids types, who don’t have a clue what Main Street Anywhere USA looks like, because they never leave their parent’s basement. All advisors of the Moron-in-Chief. That’s as far as I’ll bother with them, but this stuff is coming from them, with help from others, say, at Martha’s Vineyard(?).
The left are never going to give up, because we keep letting them accumulate power, through Congress and stolen elections. Every so often they even admit that’s what they are up to, including the theft.
But when they mess up so bad, that even they begin admitting they made the slightest mistake, like that ATF director has admitted to, which kinda makes me have a little respect for him, it’s time to sink the hook and reel them in, and rid the country of the Gestapo, known as the ATF.
They need to go. Maybe we are closer than we thought, and maybe it is because of their own actions. If that’s the case, then good riddance.
I have to point out something that I haven’t seen in a long time. The NRA has even weighed in. Perhaps the Emperor of the NRA does have clothes, after all. Maybe late joining the fight, but the Firearms Policy Coalition, the GunOwners of America and others who have been in the fight, all along, might appreciate the effort. Those groups have been making great arguments, lately. I hope this group of lawsuits against the ATF puts an end to this “Bureau”.
Please support those who support your right to keep and bear arms. This is a war about individual rights. Imagine what this war would be like without the 2nd Amendment.
Protect it as if your life depends on it. Because it does.
Truth Social: @AFNN_USA