What is the courtroom legal playbook of anti-2nd amendment tactics and strategies am I seeing develop coast-to-coast? Get the scoop here. th-cam.com/video/aDiPVU3ChMs/w-d-xo.html
The biggest threat to the 2nd amendment is the apathy and ignorance of the younger generations towards self defense, the 2nd amendment, and guns in general. That apathy will play well in the coming battles for gun rights because it will eventually get to the point where the vast majority of people won't care about "common sense" gun bans and regulations.
Anymore. I don’t care to respect laws or policies that violate rights. I’m at the point of shooting first and asking for permission later. I hope I am alone in thinking this way.
yeah no ones gonna do shit about anything america is full of a bunch of pussies now because they've been fed propaganda in school and online and are filled to the brim with goyslop thats making them fat lazy and retarded
Why are judges not held accountable for repeated rulings that violate constitutional rights? Certain courts/judges seem to pick and choose or ignore what they do not like and hand out bad decisions (opinions).
I know the feeling. We had marksmanship classes, would store our guns in our lockers if we were going hunting after school, and many of us had gun racks in our trucks. What a sad world we live in.
I'm sure breaking bad would've still taking place in Albuquerque no matter how many crazy Cali people move there lol but yes these liberal places love to invade the somewhat sane communities. Well in Miami Dade Republicans finally grew a pair and decided to take over the city in all aspects. ✌🏼
The biggest problem coming to the second amendment is what we see on a daily basis of court room ruling, being that 2nd amendment has had very important wins ,but over time the younger generation see a court ruling saying this is what you are allowed, the bill of rights is being shuffled to the back, and history is being reset that your mind set is a privilege to have the bill of rights not liberty
The problem with sensitive locations is that we still need to be able to defend ourselves in them. In fact, we might have a greater need for self-defense in such places.
Great point. Constitutional carry, BUT NOT IN... SOVIET Russia bragged about religious freedom, pointing out the beautiful church in Moscow, but neglecting to mention the NKVD goons watching worshippers attending the state-sanctioned "freedom." Nor did they mention it was the ONLY one open.
The Anti - Gunners knows this but if they are successful they can see 👀 us Gun Owners without our Firearms which is their goal let alone that one day these Anti -Gunners just might need to protect themselves ♦️
I wish that I could give a billion thumbs-up! This is an absolutely excellent summary of where things are. Thank you so much for putting this together!
The biggest threat to 2A is the inability of 2A proponents to present ourselves, whether just individual gun owners or 2A bloggers, in a demeanor that does not immediately meet with rejection by - at the very least - the persuadable who live outside of our echo chamber. The messenger is the message. Tom is solidly on the right track. Our opponents out number us among voters who elect legislators, governors, and presidents. We are outnumbered in electoral college representation. The courts are unreliable. Our current majority in SCOTUS can change with a vacancy and an unfavorable balance in the US senate.
In my opinion it comes from the fact that the left/anti gunners aren't entirely wrong about us. Meaning when they say we're a bunch of Trump nut hugging racists who either don't care about social issues or pretend they don't exist and don't care about the violence happening in the world, they're not entirely wrong. We know they're partially wrong because we have men like Tom, Colion Noir, me and I'm sure you, who are fighting in good faith on these things. But speaking from my Anecdotal experience (Which can't be said to be small because I've lived multiple places over 30 years and known a lot of people of all kinds as we all have,) there really are a lot of conservatives who are simply racists, who like Trump because they perceive him as racist and uncaring to people these types of conservatives don't care about, and there really are a lot of conservatives whose best thought out argument when confronted with gun violence is "Cry about it lib" because it's not an issue they're actually that educated about or an issue they even care about. I used to be liberal, until I was about 27, and the biggest weakness I've seen is that too much of the conservative world really is the stereotypical redneck type with hypertension that the left makes us out to be. As well as too much talk and not enough action with our votes, protests, etc. Those who are against us spend a lot more time getting themselves together with facts and groups and votes, they're a team intent on their goals. We have a lot of people who aren't actually that educated, just opinionated and from a more ignorant background, who are content to post "gotcha" comments on social media and TH-cam. I think if we're gonna come out on top, we need God. Because doing it our way has led to them being in the lead. And us holding ourselves back.
@@pcbe6573You don't even know who the second amendment attackers are do you? You realize it's not just what you call the left right? No politician who works within the uni party wants us armed. I mean think about it dude You're on a video for a former criminal prosecutor How many prohibited persons laws do you think he prosecuted people under? This buffoon was talking about how gun control started out as a way to disarm people like native Americans and freed slaves basically all the folks that no one really liked in this country. That's what gun control still is today. It's just a way to disarm people that you disagree with. You're on a video made by a traitor who's part of the problem talking about how to solve a problem that you can't even identify the root cause of.
Sir, I've been a police officer since 1981 and USMC before that. So, 2A has been part of my life both professionally and hobby (USPSA, IDPA, ICORE, Steel match, etc etc.) for a loooong time. Therefore, I make sure to watch every one of your videos to help stay current on legal aspects of 2A and legislation. America 🇺🇸 you are well advised to take this lawyers advice.
My fellow Marine, when in uniform, working for the government we are not exercising the right to keep and bear Arms under the 2A. We are wielding the power of the government. The 2A is an order or command to the government not to interfere with the people's right to keep and bear Arms. The US government has interfered with the right since 1934. I worked out this understanding over years, so I'm trying to communicate it to you.
@@BigTomInTheBasement you volunteered to be an enforcer for what is by definition an inherently inefficient, wasteful, and coercive territorial monopolist of ultimate decisionmaking and violence: The US Federal Government….I was grateful there were Vets in my family that warned us against doing this when I was young. Again: Young Americans need to stop volunteering to act as enforcers for the insane policies (foreign & domestic) of what is by definition an inherently inefficient, wasteful, and coercive territorial monopolist of ultimate decisionmaking and violence: The US Federal Government.
What good is owning one when the owner is a lazy soft fat social media addicted millennial or gen x who is not man enough to be like his ancestors? MOST are keyboard warriors. Tough as nails online. How many gave up their freedoms during the covid farce? MOST DID. I rest my case.
I vote for Tom to make in-depth videos on anything concerning the 2A. My belief is that you can never have too much information when it comes to 2A issues. I'd especially like to see a video regarding the anti's "playbook" mentioned in the video...praemonitus, praemunitus (forewarned is forearmed). Thanks for your always appreciated and vital information on these issues, Tom. --Glenn, Proud USCCA member
Legal age, the militia act sets it immediately after constitution signed, military draft, selective service act established it, Voting rights and tax filing specify 18, these established the precedent on legal age. Simple.
Tom, You are reaching a large audience. Not everyone is going to be interested in the same SPECIFIC things, but we are all interested in laws that affect us in general. If you were to put out a video that had only 20% interest, that video would still be valuable to that 20%. I find ALL of your videos important, but on a personal level, some are more relevant than others. To quote you, "Your mileage may vary". Bottom line, if a subject is important enough for you to bring to our atention, it's important! I am very grateful for the time and effort you put into these videos, and I'm sure the vast majority of your audience feels the same way. Thank you Tom!
California has complicated this much further in a number of ways. For instance they just went ahead and cited some laws from the early 19th century that prohibited groups like blacks, American Indians, etc., from having guns. They also did something else insidious. California has had, for decades, pre-emption. Back in the '70s, when Dianne Feinstein was Mayor of San Francisco, the city passed a very strict gun control measure, which essentially prohibited private ownership of firearms, for anyone not a cop. I remember DiFi (that was her nickname back then) signed the measure or whatever into law. Afterwards, she did something you had to give her credit for, and which no modern gun control politician will do: she went down to the local police station and surrendered her gun. I still remember, she had a 2" .38 revolver (this *was* the '70s) and she took it out of her purse, unloaded it, and handed it to a cop. Thing is, a bit later the State Supreme Court overturned San Francisco's law, saying that the State's laws preempt such a thing. California's legislature has overturned this; nowadays if you have a CCW, if you travel outside your city/county, you must familiarize yourself with the local laws wherever you go to avoid violating them. Seriously. As far as things like the mag bans and the AR bans, it's my belief that they'll never stop. If they're told 10 rounds is Unconstitutional, they'll try 11, then 9, then whatever they can think of. Each time they get struck down in court, they'll delay, delay, delay, and appeal everything ad naseum. I keep saying, they're waiting for vacancies on SCOTUS because this is going to be one thing where precedent will be meaningless to the liberal justices on the court. They want to overturn all of this, and if they can't, they'll settle for enforcing Unconstitutional laws, convicting people of felonies that are later overturned, and arguing that they should be prohibited posessors anyway. And if I *did* move out of state, I certainly wouldn't vote for this crap anywhere else. As far as I'm concerned, the rest of the country chased all their crazies to California, ruined my state, and then laughed at the result.
The supposed great NRA helped pass those earlier laws. Just because blacks were starting to arm themselves. So they actually pushed for gun control laws to happen. The NRA is also very quiet when things happen like that police officer in Minnesota (not chauvin) shot a black man in front of his wife and daughter after he told the officer he was carrying legally, and the officer told him to remove his pistol from his pocket, while doing so, he dumped a bunch of bullets into him. It was clearly murder and an untrained scared cop. The NRA didn’t help or condemn it at all. Nothing happened to the officer.. Although they do help serve a purpose.. they are a corrupt and racist organization. We need a much better pro 2a organization fighting for everybody. Not just who they chose or pays them the most money.
DiFi got that .38 back in the early 90's when hubby had a heart attack and someone broke one of her windows. She's still got it today and packs it wherever she pleases.
You're welcome in the PNW. We need to start taking this shore back. We defend this country from invasion when the Navy fails, and given our economy, it's probably more of "when", than "if". We are in the midst of a Roman-style collapse, and we need to be able to defend the shore. I abandoned California, because I did not choose to be born there, but, I am much more stubborn about abandoning the PNW. This is the perfect terrain for defense, and there's not enough taxes or support to create a police state. The laws don't matter if they can't, or better yet, won't enforce it. I don't care if they're elected, how many accolades and stars they have, or even whether they live under a bridge. The thing that dictates what a traitor is, is how they answer to and adhere to: "Do you swear to uphold the constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic?"
I've been watching you for the last few months and have to say they're the best 2A videos on the interwebz. You mentioned the possibility of doing one on the anti-gunners playbook. Absolutely, 100% do it. Thanks for your content.
9 of the 10 amendments to the Constitution are applied equally in every corner of the country. Only the 2nd Amendment is treated like a red headed stepchild and allowed to be interpreted and bullied by each individual state and even local governments. I believe it's time for the Supreme Court to explicitly enumerate to the states that they are no longer able to create fiat laws infringing on that constitutionally protected right. The interpretation of the 2nd Amendment is not a power to be delegated to the states and any laws restricting it's protections are only to come from Congress.
It's really too bad there is no provision in the Constitution to expel a state that refuses to comply with all Amendments. I really wish Tom. Thank you for constantly updating what should be a simple don't infringe or you're a new country.
States are America's resources. We should not give them away to leftist takeover. We should take over the leftists, while keeping our states in alignment.
All gun owners that I know are very ethical and decent people. The ones going after the only thing keeping US free, have no ethics whatsoever. Evil never sleeps and has no code of conduct.
Many thanks Tom, for your clear and concise expressions. I do very much appreciate your videos. To add, I also follow armed scholar for his videos as well. You and 2-3 others give updates on our 2A situations without much drama. Again, thank you. Subbed, clicked like, and here for the algorithms.
What happens when a state tells the supreme court to "get bent, we don't care about your ruling" and just continues to pass unconstitutional laws? How are those states really going to be forced into compliance?
That's where this country needs to decide wether we are going to follow the Supreme Court, or the 10th Amendment. That is in desperate need of clarification. Sovereignty falls to individual states according to the 10th amendment.
Tom, I have a SERIOUS question. When will our 2A rights regarding traveling to multiple states be restored? I live in WA state and have a concealed carry permit. I also like to take long road trips across multiple states riding my motorcycle. WA concealed carry permit decides what states I can and cannot carry based on reciprocity laws. I'm an AMERICAN CITIZEN and believe I have the God given right listed as a 2A constitutional right to carry in any state I wish. Will this ever be overturned?
This video doesn't once mention the extreme infringements that have been enacted in 2022 and 2023 in Washington State and Oregon. - WA HB 1240 bans ALL semi-auto rifles, regardless of features, and also bans all their parts. - Right now it isn't even possible for WA gun owners to buy a replacement part - spring or pin or anything - for an AR, or a threaded barrel, a grip, anything. Both the WA and OR gun ban statutes have even been rules constitutional by gun prohibitionist judges. - The progress of the Washington State, Oregon, and Commiefornia gun ban and mag ban statutes toward the SCOTUS is going to be critical.
I have to say, as not only an Oregunian, but a far-Left Libertarian Progressive, I was SHOCKED that Oregon passed measure 114. Then I came to my senses and realized that our votes don't really matter and I would wager a year's pay that votes were either suppressed or changed to get it to pass by 0.6%. Sure, there are a bunch of shit-libs here, but I just can't believe that Deschutes County was split 50/50. I've become more and more disillusioned by our voting system and am to the point of believing that it's all theater.
USv. Heller was not the only case that stated the 2nd amendment was an individual right. Back in August of 1998 the case of USv. Emerson also stated that the 2nd was an individual right.
Super job of breaking down the legal issues. I am 2A all the way and thinks that our founders were wise beyond their time. Sensitive places, gas stations, really? Anywhere we expose ourselves having to open a car door is a point of attack from criminals, carjackers, robbers, and worse, we need to be able to defend ourselves in these places. Everywhere guns are prohibited, is where criminals look to steal them from, just look at the statistics for gun theft from vehicles including unattended police vehicles. Criminals know to stake out courts, post offices, etc. I am for universal national 2A reciprocity! Whatever that takes. We need common sense and logical rulings. More of everything please! Thank you.
Shut up.. I'm so sick of seeing you super duper freedom advocates talking about that.. Incase you didn't notice, they just manufactured 20 million felons over plastic.. Havard did a study that found the average American commits multiple felonies a month , completely unaware they had ever broken a law. You all stay crying about how how we should take guns from these people and those people and anybody but us... It's disgusting how slow you are.
They don't want to disarm people with no regard for law and who have evil intentions. They want to disarm good people who try to do their best to be good and peaceful and only want to defend their families and country. Because foreign and domestic bureaucrats are trying to destroy this country. So far demoralization has been a wild success that would make Mao blush with envy. The subliminal application of their propaganda is on another level.
I believe SCOTUS intended to refer to the time of the inclusion of the amendment in 1791. They go on to mention the late 1860's as that was when the 14th amendment was added to make all rights safe from restriction at the state level.
This attorney isn't actually strong enough about gun rights. A true pro rights interpretation of the 2A deems ALL firearm restriction statutes unconstitutional. A true pro rights interpretation of the 2A makes it clear that even the notion of "prohibited persons" and age limits are all unconstitutional (didn't even exist federally until 1968).. A true pro rights interpretation of the 2A makes is clear that the notion of "sensitive places" is also unconstitutional nonsense concocted from whole cloth. Pursuant to the "plain language" doctrine, nothing in the "shall not be infringed" clause opens the door for any kind of firearm restriction or regulation in any form, period, full stop. - Americans need to stop treating the 2A in a second class manner that denies its existence as an inalienable right.
State of the situation is always appreciated, very rarely do I see it being shown. Would love to hear the backstory on original gun control, as well as your thoughts on accessories
It's really not that exciting. The first "gun control" laws prohibited the open carry of pistols in towns while the first possession prohibitions were leveled specifically at regional "undesirables" or black people. The next wave was directed at the confederates after the civil war and was meant mostly to be punitive. All it really accomplished was creating another excuse to found the Klan and the further codification of arbitrary gun restriction at levels above the municipal where it had been. It doesn't get "interesting" until the Gen 1 progressives started getting political power in the early 1900's. That's when the current idea of rights being on a sliding scale based on government desires started popping up.
I might add that the open carry restrictions stand under the current prescribed reading of 2A while the possession prohibitions do NOT due to their roots in racism and cannot be recreated due to ethnic/class exclusion is fundamental to them
Don't forget the big brother .308 and/or 6.5 Creedmoor caliber AR10, the larger bore firearm the ignorant gun prohibitionists don't seem to know even exists.
Thank you for this informative/disturbing presentation! I'm happy to currently live in Missouri that is a state still holding it's own against anti 2A. Very disturbing things are happing in our fast failing country!
Or you know, use these 👇 "This Constitution, and laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding." [US Constitution] "If any statement within any law which is passed, is unconstitutional, the whole law is unconstitutional..." [Marbury v. Madison: 5 US 137 (1803)] "While an emergency can not create power, and no emergency justifies the violation of any of the provisions of the United States Constitution or States Constitutions, Public emergency, such as economic depression for especially liberal constructions of constitutional powers, has been declared that because of national emergency, it is the policy of the courts of times of national peril, so liberally to construe the special powers vested in the chief executive as to sustain and effectuate the purpose there of, and to that end also more liberally to construe the constituted division and classification of the powers of the coordinated branches of the government and in so far as may not be clearly inconsistent with the constitution." [16 AM Jur 2d., Sec. 98] "...every man is independent of all laws, except those prescribed by nature. He is not bound by any institutions formed by his fellowman WITHOUT HIS CONSENT.” [Cruden v. Neale] "The common law is the real law, the Surpeme Law of the Land, the code, rules, regulations, policy and statutes are not the law." [Self v. Rhay, 61 Wn (2d) 261] "All codes, rules, and regulations are for government authorities only, not human/creators in accordance with God's laws. All codes, rules, and regulations are unconstitutional and lacking due process." [Rodriques v. Ray Donavan (U.S. Department of Labor) 769 F. 2d 1344, 1348 (1985)] "All laws, rules and practices which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void." [Marbury v. Madison, 5th US (2 Cranch) 137, 174, 176, (1803)] "...that statutes which would deprive a citizen of the rights of person and property without a regular trail, according to the course and usage of common law, would not be the law of the land." [Hoke v. Henderson, 15, N.C. 15, 25 AM Dec 677] "No state shall convert a liberty into a license, and charge a fee therefore." [Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105] "If the State converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee, and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity." [Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham, Alabama, 373 U.S. 262] "The state cannot diminish rights of the people." [Hurtado v. People of the State of California, 110 U.S. 516] "The assertion of federal rights, [Bill of Rights] when plainly and reasonably made is not to be defeated under name of local practice." [Davis v. Wechsler, 263 US 22, 24] "Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them." [Miranda v. Arizona, 384 US 436, 491] "There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of this exercise or Constitutional rights." [Sherer v. Cullen, 481 F 946] "The Government of the United States has been emphatically termed a government of laws, and not of men. It will certainly cease to deserve this high appellation if the laws furnished no remedy for violation of a vested legal right." [Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803)] "Judges Sworn To Obey Constitution Irrespective Of Opinion & Consequences - Constitution Rules over Statues" [AMERICAN JURIS PRUDENCE BOOK 16: CONSTITUTION LAW SECTION]
Thank you for your coverage. Outstanding presentation and help. One thing I've never understood. How can government make a list of ineligible people who can't enjoy their God given rights. Especially considering that the 2nd Amendment is the only Amendment that government is allowed to strip
Good stuff, I’m interested in all the topics you mentioned. I’m a Oregon resident and gun owners here are under a fierce attack and at this time it’s unknown if we will perceiver in retaining our 2nd Amendment rights. Thank you for your work.
This 2A rights stuff is just scary! How in the world are criminals ever going to be able to commit horrific acts brutality and commit unspeakable acts of horror on innocent victims if those intended victims are armed? It’s just wrong for criminals and their lifestyles for Americans to have 2A rights!
We need to get non repeat felons their Right back! They are treated like second class citizens right now. If you're good enough to be a wage slave, then you're good enough to possess a firearm.
My ex was a convicted felon on a gun charge and child abuse. I would not go anywhere with him alone nor let my child go alone with him even though we were divorced and due to a father's right state, he was granted the right of unsupervised visitation. I did not trust his behavior with out a firearm, yet alone with a firearm, with my child or myself. His felony charge was not his 1st criminal action including a firearm, just the 1st time he was caught and charged. Before he was incarcerated his mental health was evaluated and he was found to be bipolar. After his release, he faced 5 years on probation. He walked a straight line while on paper. The day he was off paper was the day he stopped taking his psych meds and started on a downward slide with more frequent abuse both physically and mentally. Needless to say, he is back in prison for a gun possession charge as a convicted felon. Before anyone should jump on the bandwagon to restore convicted felons gun rights the most important issue is that the nature of the felony must be addressed as to was it any type of domestic violence, gun or lethal use of an object to commit bodily harm, and other charges of that sort. Then the persons mental health must be evaluated preferably by 3 different clinicians, and do they require meds to be a productive and safe person. They should have to have acquired no felonies of any sort for 10 years after their probation time is over. And then a evaluation on an individual case should be determined. The same restoration of gun rights cannot be the same for every felon. It MUST be on am individual case, as long as the person successfully meets all the criteria.
@sds5502 I had a felony 2 decades ago for theft in Illinois. There is NO WAY to get my rights back through their process unless you have money to grease the right people. If you are allowed to be in public, then you deserve ALL your rights as a human being under God. You can't go PRE crime and try to predict what people will do. You need more harsher sentences for certain crimes and proper evaluations before release. Not making someone a second class citizen and leaving them defenseless after paying their debt. You are wrong, and it's un-American.
i was married to a crazy wife in 2002 my X wife throw a empty wine bottle at me like iny other time the pigs come out and the guy i goes to jail i went to court i was not as smart back then then i im now i took a misdeminer 10 year ban on firearms i never had fierarms at the house because i did not trust her remember i have a 1 and a 2 year old at this time its been 21 years since that happend i went to go buy a gun they said i was denied because of 922g.9 to this day i got full custody of the kids they figuerd out she was lieing
Two arguments in play here: non-violent felons should have full RKBA restored once they have served their time. Violent felons, as we see over and over again, have a lot of difficulty avoiding repeating such behavior once they're out. Their cases must be carefully evaluated, and we must err on the side of continued suspension of RKBA. I don't like that, but I reason that a violent felon who gets his or her RKBA back then commits a crime with a firearm is a very bad look for 2A. If that same felon does _not_ get his or her RKBA restored, and commits a crime with a firearm, the anti-2A crowd cannot blame 2A. I would argue that if a felon is deemed unworthy of RKBA restoration, he or she should probably remain incarcerated.
@rangersmith4652 Exactly, I said in my original comment, "Non repeat," felons. Also, harsher sentences for violent crimes, as well as psychological evaluations before release. It's going to be an imperfect system, but you can't try to force evil from existence by punishing someone who's been reformed.
Maybe I'm a public policy nerd; but I really love these videos. I think a video on the absurd (historical) case law which tried to disarm various groups would be most interesting! Excellent work, Tom.
Thank you for a clear and concise, as possible, explanation of where we are at. I would welcome a deeper dive on all of the 5, possibly with a video of each. I also would appreciate where we can download that anti 2A playbook you referenced. Lastly is it possible that short barrel rifles might be taken out of the NFA altogether. I appreciate that Congress very well may have intend to do what they did. It seemed to me they wanted handguns but the push back didn't allow that and SBR were something of a consolation prize. Even given legislative intent, Congress still can't sweep aside the rights that we had that the 2nd like the others restrained the government not the people. I became disable after serving more than 35 years in EMS. I am headed towards being confined to a wheelchair and a AR pistol is the really only practical weapon, other than handguns that can be carried with any hope of being even somewhat concealed and manipulated. I am about as handy with a pistol than the next guy, that is I can probably hit the broadside of a barn. A rifle on the other hand I can hit a man sized target in any event I can think of for defense of myself, my family or the innocent.
there should be no prohibited persons. If you commit a crime you go to jail or prison where your rights are restrained but never stripped from you so as soon as you walk out of jail or prison you still have your rights fully intact. If you're not safe enough to have a gun then you're not safe enough to be walking around in public. age to purchase and carry ALL firearms should be 17. Most people probably drive by then or are of legal age to potentially get a full driver's license and therefore have the right to protect themselves while they are away from their parents' protection. If the age of majority is going to be 21 then enlisting in the military, getting credit cards/loans, voting, etc should be 21 as well. What is an ordinary firearm? Any firearm that is mainstream by a reputable company, is in citizens' hands for all lawful purposes, and any that the government agencies/military possesses. PLUS, we're not restricted to ordinary firearms to begin with. It is ARMS. Short for military armaments- anything the military uses for offensive or defensive purposes. PERIOD. The only thing that should not be covered is nondiscriminate weapons of mass destruction that even the government shouldn't be allowed to own: nukes, chemical, and biological weapons. sensitive places: capital buildings etc where liberals could walk in and shoot everyone. Courtrooms as well because of the emotionally charged atmosphere. We also need laws that say all private companies open to the public are bound by the 2nd amendment as well. There should be a distinction between private property rights as for as a private residential home that can restrict firearms vs private companies open to the public (with or without a membership.) Also, no workplace can say no guns allowed especially while locked up in your vehicle and if it was up to me they couldnt even restrict it in the buildings unless it was maybe a nuclear facility or somewhere where idk maybe molten metal like welding could melt a glock and possibly make a round go off. schools should not be allowed to be sensitive places. we've been doing that and look at the results. stop the stupidity. open carry of any firearm should be legal and federally protected in all 50 states. criminals, cowards, and those ashamed of what they are doing hide their actions. Any swatting, false reporting and causing a panic etc should have a mandatory sentence of 20 years in prison. It is time to strip qualified and absolute immunity from cops, judges, lawmakers, etc. If a cop draws his firearm when he/she has not been shot at or threatened with deadly force at a minimum they should be fired and have some sort of permanent record that keeps them from ever working in an official capacity even as an unarmed guard with a private company much less a government agency. If they point a gun at someone who has not pointed a gun, shot at them, or have been threatened with a credible deadly weapon then they should immediately be charged with assault with a deadly weapon with a minimum sentence of 20 years. If they shoot or shoot at someone in those circumstances they should immediately be charged with attempted murder and have to face a jury of anti-cops to prove their innocence. We need a court specifically run by we the people who have authority over judges, lawmakers, and cops. Any time an unconstitutional gun law is making its way through the courts it could be struck down permanently by this court. This court may even strike down the supreme court and reprimand ANY government official. They will have the authority to arrest anti gun governors and try them in citizens court for conspiracy and treason. On top of that gun control laws are permanently frozen. ANY new gun control law must be approved by the citizens court before it can be written into law. Who runs/qualifies for this court? gun tubers, cop watchers and pretty much any anti-government pro freedom constitution-loving American who has a recorded history of their beliefs in the public eye. We somehow need to add a constitutional amendment to the bill of rights that simply states: NO VICTIM? NO CRIME! i could go on and on but this is long enough....
I don't know if you seen this, On Patrol Live , in California, an police office had a pistol with thread barrel and he was saying is was a Assault Weapon because it was threaded. He was looking up the California code too charge him.
I would really enjoy a sit down with you, for a thorough look into words and meanings in the Constitution. Not just our present 2A battle. Thanks Tom, for your expertise and legalsplaining extraordinar
Do a video on accessories. I live in a jurisdiction that considers "materials for the manufacture of arms" as "arms" and prohibits their possession without a license. They deny every license application under local law because the local law doesn't provide for licenses for the materials for manufacture, only .22 rifles and standard caliber shotguns (not their parts). It's a roundabout way of banning 80% lowers. FYI, this is in the unincorporated territory of American Samoa. The AG's office here has said it's questionable whether the 2A even applies here. The Dept. of Interior administers the territory but allows the local government to pass laws of local application. The local gov't has passed laws banning handguns also, despite Heller. Lots there, I know, but a video on accessories would be very helpful as it relates to the Vanderstok case on 80% lowers.
Did Gatling guns have restrictions? If not then full auto should be allowed. Most government building have prescreening before entry (by armed people) but schools are mostly undefended. They are sitting targets. Schools need to be either protected by armed security OR adults allowed to carry as a deterrent.
My state, Maine, is a Constitutional Carry State. There are still some particulars with “constitutional carry” with which I disagree - certain “sensitive areas” and the exclusion of felons. We all know that certain sensitive areas may result in one becoming a “sitting duck”. On the subject of felons, one who commits a crime is issued a sentence. Once that sentence is complete, one has theoretically paid their debt to society. One should not have to go through the rest of one’s life with a label slapped on them. One should also not be denied the right to defend one’s self or one’s family. I realize this is a sensitive subject, and I personally feel that there are certain crimes which should be subject to firearm prohibition. (These all have to do with violent crimes against another human being or animal.) Most men and women in our penal system, or that have been through our penal system, are non-violent offenders. If someone commits a crime with a motor vehicle, their state may remove their license to drive for a time. They may be required to take a driving course to have their license reinstated. If one commits a felony with a motor vehicle, their license is reinstated, but they are labeled a felon for the rest of their life, and cannot carry a firearm. Where is the sense in that. If someone commits forgery and goes to prison, they cannot carry a fire arm. We all know I can go on with this in for quite a while. This is egregious and nonsensical. But then again, most of the laws in this country don’t seem to make a whole lot of sense anymore. We all need to stand up and demand that changes are made.
I’d like to hear your view on the ATF and what they’re doing to the FFL’s especially the small kitchen table FFL in Oklahoma where one agent said tell your friends that were coming to shut down gun shows. Thank you for all your doing.
Included in SCOTUS Bruen decision was a Concurring Opinion by Justice Alito, wherein he says… "Our holding decides nothing about who may lawfully possess a firearm or the requirements that must be met to buy a gun. Nor does it decide anything about the kinds of weapons that people may possess." It seems to me that second sentence left open an avenue for anti-gunners to propose bans on AR (and related) types of long guns. What is your read on Alito's Concurring Opinion?
Very good video! Concise assessment put very straight forward! One point on prohibited persons and "history and tradition": I believe this point is HUGE, yet I haven't seen anyone else seize upon this point. That is, the anti-gunners are attempting to come up with creative, obscure, examples of prohibited persons laws in the 19th century, yet I contend that none really exist. I feel that the point is proven by the fact that even in the late 19th century one could walk into a Sears and Roebuck's and purchase any weapon of choice, no questions asked, and if ANY prohibited persons laws existed at the time, this simply wouldn't be the case. As I said, in my opinion, this is HUGE. Perhaps I'm delusional and it's not that important. If I am, I would like to know. I have ran this argument by various forums, etc., and it doesn't seem to pick up legs. If you're reading this and would be so kind as to offer your opinion, I'm all ears, and open to your thoughts.
It is beyond praiseworthy that a knowledgeable, articulate attorney should spend his time analyzing these considerations and presenting them to us laymen in terms we can understand. Mr. Grieve, I salute you.
This is a spot on channel. Language from an attorney that isn’t riddled with technical lawyer jargon that I can’t understand, unlike the other lawyer guy who shall remain nameless.
What "penalty/deterrence" is there for lower courts that ignore SCOTUS regarding Bruen, Heller, McDonald, etc? Is there any "discipline" for politicians, other than voting them out?
Thank you for your video. I would like to see an extended video on the pros and cons of being a gun owner. I am referring to having a gun for personal protection. I do not have any prior experience with guns.
To all modern anti-gun advocates that claim accessories to firearms are not covered by the 2A, that is ridiculous. How could it have been possible in the historical context since the 1700's and 1800's when up to the start of the U.S. Civil War, most common firearms had been muzzleloader, single shot flintlocks and caplocks that REQUIRE accessories to function, such as ramrods and flint or percussion caps? So of course accessories to firearms are included in the 2A as being protected items, even up to the current era of 21st century firearms that are in common use today.
My state's, New Mexico, legislature is looking at several get around to SCOTUS's rulings. I'd like you to review such. Also, what about older laws, e.g., NFA and New York's Sullivan law?
I'd like to see something on magazines. My thought is that the weapon can not work without one, so it shouldn't be considered an accessory as it's a vital part of the assembly.
Covering the play book for anti-2A parties would help give the firearm community an idea what we will be up against (their logic and arguments) so a strong defense can be created and implemented.
It would be helpful to know from a legal perspective whether it is helpful and wise to obtain an FFL or is it a legal risk an unwise? In the old days everyone in my circles was trying to get one as it made purchasing firearms and other related products easier. It was believed among my circles that the ATF was fearful of people doing exactly that, and as prevention they were requiring storefronts or other expensive overhead to discourage people from becoming FFL holders. In your video about “are you a dealer” you read different cases where it was necessary for a person to obtain an FFL based on making a profit for example with no requirements for storefronts or any other overhead, just, it seemed, file out the application jump through a few hoops and pay the fee. Would you please clarify? Thanks for all you are doing for us, and please keep up the good work.
I think there's one 'dark horse' subject that not a lot of people are talking about. We can argue about the Constitutionality of various gun control law till we are all blue in the face, but what happens when NON-public entities keep you from acquiring arms, parts, or ammunition? Although not strictly a firearms issue, I had one of my credit card companies refuse to allow a transaction to go through from an online ammo dealer. Now, we ALL know about how the Federal government was working with Big Tech companies to suppress free speech on social media platforms. We ALSO know that the ATF and IRS are harassing businesses that deal in 2A related products. Meanwhile, there have been several 2A related companies who have basically been shut down because the banking institutions they were using unilaterally (and in at least one case, WITHOUT WARNING) refused to continue doing business with them. 2A related businesses NEED access to banking services to STAY in business. Likewise, we as individuals would find it hard to purchase 2A related products without access to banking services. There is nothing to stop ALL banks and credit card companies from restricting their customers from being able to uses their credit and debit cards to purchase firearms, parts, and ammunition. And, without SIGNIFICANT proof, there would be no way to tie those restrictions to governmental entities (nod nod, wink wink), thereby BYPASSING any Constitutionality issues. As I stated above, this has actually already happened to me once. And I know for a fact that it has happened to others. And now, with CBDCs on the horizon, your access to your OWN money could be severely restricted for ANY reason that the powers-that-be decide. When (not IF) THAT happens, you can kiss any thoughts of fighting these measures on Constitutionality grounds goodbye.
What is the courtroom legal playbook of anti-2nd amendment tactics and strategies am I seeing develop coast-to-coast? Get the scoop here. th-cam.com/video/aDiPVU3ChMs/w-d-xo.html
The biggest threat to the 2nd amendment is the apathy and ignorance of the younger generations towards self defense, the 2nd amendment, and guns in general. That apathy will play well in the coming battles for gun rights because it will eventually get to the point where the vast majority of people won't care about "common sense" gun bans and regulations.
Magazines are accessories in automatic firearms as cylinders are accessories on revolvers.
Anymore. I don’t care to respect laws or policies that violate rights. I’m at the point of shooting first and asking for permission later. I hope I am alone in thinking this way.
does anyone else get a Zen music video on this connection? tried it several times still get the Zen music video
Why does this take me to a Zen music page? Are you implying that we will need to be zen in order to deal with the anti-self defense people?
“When tyranny becomes law, rebellion becomes duty”
yeah no ones gonna do shit about anything america is full of a bunch of pussies now because they've been fed propaganda in school and online and are filled to the brim with goyslop thats making them fat lazy and retarded
NOT Thomas Jefferson…
@@earth7551 ok fed
@@Frankie5Angels150 Pretty sure it was Hamilton, aka Mr. Central Authority himself.
Exactly
Why are judges not held accountable for repeated rulings that violate constitutional rights? Certain courts/judges seem to pick and choose or ignore what they do not like and hand out bad decisions (opinions).
Bc we let them get away with it. They day we mount up is the day shit changes.
Because democrats install treasonous judges and democrats control the justice department.
New Mexico was very firearms friendly. We had a .22lr rifle team in high school. Then we were invaded by Californians.
I know the feeling. We had marksmanship classes, would store our guns in our lockers if we were going hunting after school, and many of us had gun racks in our trucks.
What a sad world we live in.
Smh
I feel your pain. I was a resident of both new mexico and colorado and both states were tragically invaded.
I had a man and his wife from California move in across the street from me! They created Hell for everyone and complained about everything! Watch out!
I'm sure breaking bad would've still taking place in Albuquerque no matter how many crazy Cali people move there lol but yes these liberal places love to invade the somewhat sane communities. Well in Miami Dade Republicans finally grew a pair and decided to take over the city in all aspects. ✌🏼
The biggest problem coming to the second amendment is what we see on a daily basis of court room ruling, being that 2nd amendment has had very important wins ,but over time the younger generation see a court ruling saying this is what you are allowed, the bill of rights is being shuffled to the back, and history is being reset that your mind set is a privilege to have the bill of rights not liberty
The 1968 gun control act must be repealed on Constitutional grounds. That will invalidate the vast majority of unconstitutional gun laws.
The problem with sensitive locations is that we still need to be able to defend ourselves in them. In fact, we might have a greater need for self-defense in such places.
Exactly, after all we all know how criminals follow laws. All those laws do is tell criminals where they are going to find the least resistance.
@@ProjectDT88 This is exactly how mass shooters choose their locations for their massacres.
Great point. Constitutional carry, BUT NOT IN...
SOVIET Russia bragged about religious freedom, pointing out the beautiful church in Moscow, but neglecting to mention the NKVD goons watching worshippers attending the state-sanctioned "freedom."
Nor did they mention it was the ONLY one open.
I would argue our greater need for self defense is what makes them "sensitive"
The Anti - Gunners knows this but if they are successful they can see 👀 us Gun Owners without our Firearms which is their goal let alone that one day these Anti -Gunners just might need to protect themselves ♦️
I wish that I could give a billion thumbs-up! This is an absolutely excellent summary of where things are. Thank you so much for putting this together!
If the 2nd is limited to muskets, then the 1st is limited to quill pens, ink pots, parchment paper, printing presses and soap boxes.
Well said.
CNN didn’t exist in the Eighteenth Century. Arrest the effers.
I realize that didn’t make much sense, but it felt good.
And the 4th doesn't apply to any electronic messaging
The Left would love to be able to regulate and censor speech that uses modern communication technologies.
Private citizens owned cannons and war ships with several cannons when the 2nd was written.
The biggest threat to 2A is the inability of 2A proponents to present ourselves, whether just individual gun owners or 2A bloggers, in a demeanor that does not immediately meet with rejection by - at the very least - the persuadable who live outside of our echo chamber. The messenger is the message. Tom is solidly on the right track. Our opponents out number us among voters who elect legislators, governors, and presidents. We are outnumbered in electoral college representation. The courts are unreliable. Our current majority in SCOTUS can change with a vacancy and an unfavorable balance in the US senate.
In my opinion it comes from the fact that the left/anti gunners aren't entirely wrong about us. Meaning when they say we're a bunch of Trump nut hugging racists who either don't care about social issues or pretend they don't exist and don't care about the violence happening in the world, they're not entirely wrong. We know they're partially wrong because we have men like Tom, Colion Noir, me and I'm sure you, who are fighting in good faith on these things. But speaking from my Anecdotal experience (Which can't be said to be small because I've lived multiple places over 30 years and known a lot of people of all kinds as we all have,) there really are a lot of conservatives who are simply racists, who like Trump because they perceive him as racist and uncaring to people these types of conservatives don't care about, and there really are a lot of conservatives whose best thought out argument when confronted with gun violence is "Cry about it lib" because it's not an issue they're actually that educated about or an issue they even care about. I used to be liberal, until I was about 27, and the biggest weakness I've seen is that too much of the conservative world really is the stereotypical redneck type with hypertension that the left makes us out to be. As well as too much talk and not enough action with our votes, protests, etc. Those who are against us spend a lot more time getting themselves together with facts and groups and votes, they're a team intent on their goals. We have a lot of people who aren't actually that educated, just opinionated and from a more ignorant background, who are content to post "gotcha" comments on social media and TH-cam. I think if we're gonna come out on top, we need God. Because doing it our way has led to them being in the lead. And us holding ourselves back.
@@pcbe6573You don't even know who the second amendment attackers are do you? You realize it's not just what you call the left right? No politician who works within the uni party wants us armed. I mean think about it dude You're on a video for a former criminal prosecutor How many prohibited persons laws do you think he prosecuted people under? This buffoon was talking about how gun control started out as a way to disarm people like native Americans and freed slaves basically all the folks that no one really liked in this country. That's what gun control still is today. It's just a way to disarm people that you disagree with. You're on a video made by a traitor who's part of the problem talking about how to solve a problem that you can't even identify the root cause of.
It looks like TH-cam has deleted a couple responses to you. 😢
@@jeffbroders9781 They have deleted some. There were more comments just earlier when I made mine.
@@jeffbroders9781 Good catch on deleted responses. TY. I am aware that some 4 or 5 of my comments have been deleted.
Sir, I've been a police officer since 1981 and USMC before that. So, 2A has been part of my life both professionally and hobby (USPSA, IDPA, ICORE, Steel match, etc etc.) for a loooong time. Therefore, I make sure to watch every one of your videos to help stay current on legal aspects of 2A and legislation. America 🇺🇸 you are well advised to take this lawyers advice.
SEMPER FI
@@anraegodley-cooper6321 Semper Fi! 🇺🇸
My fellow Marine, when in uniform, working for the government we are not exercising the right to keep and bear Arms under the 2A. We are wielding the power of the government. The 2A is an order or command to the government not to interfere with the people's right to keep and bear Arms. The US government has interfered with the right since 1934. I worked out this understanding over years, so I'm trying to communicate it to you.
@@BigTomInTheBasement you volunteered to be an enforcer for what is by definition an inherently inefficient, wasteful, and coercive territorial monopolist of ultimate decisionmaking and violence: The US Federal Government….I was grateful there were Vets in my family that warned us against doing this when I was young. Again: Young Americans need to stop volunteering to act as enforcers for the insane policies (foreign & domestic) of what is by definition an inherently inefficient, wasteful, and coercive territorial monopolist of ultimate decisionmaking and violence: The US Federal Government.
@BigTomInTheBasement Yep, I know that all too well. Just makinga general overall statement about the 2A.
Thanks!
Thank you for the clear talk. Many of us are watching these issues as if our freedom depends on it.
Which it does
Without our guns we will have our freedom violated over and over again.
It does depend on it
What good is owning one when the owner is a lazy soft fat social media addicted millennial or gen x who is not man enough to be like his ancestors? MOST are keyboard warriors. Tough as nails online. How many gave up their freedoms during the covid farce? MOST DID. I rest my case.
If your freedom depends on a law or a court decision, then I think you miss the point of the 2nd Amendment.
Repeal all weapon laws.
Yup, anyone that wants to take your means of self defense, has a plan to ruin you.
All weapons laws are unconstitutional infringements therefore they are all null and void not legally binding enforceable laws.
What about F bombs?
Disband the Government let's go the right direction !! It represents and defend only the big $ men and their families and friends .
@@johntracy72I can assure you liquid Fart is not a banned substance 😂 I've even heard some people are vaping it now 😂
I vote for Tom to make in-depth videos on anything concerning the 2A. My belief is that you can never have too much information when it comes to 2A issues. I'd especially like to see a video regarding the anti's "playbook" mentioned in the video...praemonitus, praemunitus (forewarned is forearmed). Thanks for your always appreciated and vital information on these issues, Tom. --Glenn, Proud USCCA member
Thank you! From Illinois here and Pritzker needs to rot in jail for this
Just add him to the list of governors of IL sent to prison.
There are better more permanent ways to take care of him. Not why no one has.
Thanks! Tom! First vid I really felt compelled to thank you, not only with words, but with my wallet too! Keep up the good fight Tom!
Thanks!
Legal age, the militia act sets it immediately after constitution signed, military draft, selective service act established it, Voting rights and tax filing specify 18, these established the precedent on legal age. Simple.
Tom, You are reaching a large audience. Not everyone is going to be interested in the same SPECIFIC things, but we are all interested in laws that affect us in general. If you were to put out a video that had only 20% interest, that video would still be valuable to that 20%. I find ALL of your videos important, but on a personal level, some are more relevant than others. To quote you, "Your mileage may vary". Bottom line, if a subject is important enough for you to bring to our atention, it's important! I am very grateful for the time and effort you put into these videos, and I'm sure the vast majority of your audience feels the same way. Thank you Tom!
California has complicated this much further in a number of ways. For instance they just went ahead and cited some laws from the early 19th century that prohibited groups like blacks, American Indians, etc., from having guns. They also did something else insidious.
California has had, for decades, pre-emption. Back in the '70s, when Dianne Feinstein was Mayor of San Francisco, the city passed a very strict gun control measure, which essentially prohibited private ownership of firearms, for anyone not a cop. I remember DiFi (that was her nickname back then) signed the measure or whatever into law. Afterwards, she did something you had to give her credit for, and which no modern gun control politician will do: she went down to the local police station and surrendered her gun. I still remember, she had a 2" .38 revolver (this *was* the '70s) and she took it out of her purse, unloaded it, and handed it to a cop. Thing is, a bit later the State Supreme Court overturned San Francisco's law, saying that the State's laws preempt such a thing. California's legislature has overturned this; nowadays if you have a CCW, if you travel outside your city/county, you must familiarize yourself with the local laws wherever you go to avoid violating them. Seriously.
As far as things like the mag bans and the AR bans, it's my belief that they'll never stop. If they're told 10 rounds is Unconstitutional, they'll try 11, then 9, then whatever they can think of. Each time they get struck down in court, they'll delay, delay, delay, and appeal everything ad naseum. I keep saying, they're waiting for vacancies on SCOTUS because this is going to be one thing where precedent will be meaningless to the liberal justices on the court. They want to overturn all of this, and if they can't, they'll settle for enforcing Unconstitutional laws, convicting people of felonies that are later overturned, and arguing that they should be prohibited posessors anyway.
And if I *did* move out of state, I certainly wouldn't vote for this crap anywhere else. As far as I'm concerned, the rest of the country chased all their crazies to California, ruined my state, and then laughed at the result.
We didn’t “chase the crazies to California”. Crazies have ALWAYS flocked to California as some sort of Mecca. Please keep them there. 😅
The supposed great NRA helped pass those earlier laws. Just because blacks were starting to arm themselves. So they actually pushed for gun control laws to happen. The NRA is also very quiet when things happen like that police officer in Minnesota (not chauvin) shot a black man in front of his wife and daughter after he told the officer he was carrying legally, and the officer told him to remove his pistol from his pocket, while doing so, he dumped a bunch of bullets into him. It was clearly murder and an untrained scared cop. The NRA didn’t help or condemn it at all. Nothing happened to the officer.. Although they do help serve a purpose.. they are a corrupt and racist organization. We need a much better pro 2a organization fighting for everybody. Not just who they chose or pays them the most money.
I don't see any humor in this. I feel very bad for the people of California who are normal and want to own guns and be left alone to enjoy them. :(
DiFi got that .38 back in the early 90's when hubby had a heart attack and someone broke one of her windows. She's still got it today and packs it wherever she pleases.
You're welcome in the PNW. We need to start taking this shore back. We defend this country from invasion when the Navy fails, and given our economy, it's probably more of "when", than "if". We are in the midst of a Roman-style collapse, and we need to be able to defend the shore.
I abandoned California, because I did not choose to be born there, but, I am much more stubborn about abandoning the PNW. This is the perfect terrain for defense, and there's not enough taxes or support to create a police state. The laws don't matter if they can't, or better yet, won't enforce it.
I don't care if they're elected, how many accolades and stars they have, or even whether they live under a bridge. The thing that dictates what a traitor is, is how they answer to and adhere to:
"Do you swear to uphold the constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic?"
Thank you for what you do for 2a community. Love the channel and the breakdowns
I've been watching you for the last few months and have to say they're the best 2A videos on the interwebz. You mentioned the possibility of doing one on the anti-gunners playbook. Absolutely, 100% do it. Thanks for your content.
These videos are so informative. I appreciate it coming from a qualified professional that keeps us up to date on the most recent rulings.
9 of the 10 amendments to the Constitution are applied equally in every corner of the country. Only the 2nd Amendment is treated like a red headed stepchild and allowed to be interpreted and bullied by each individual state and even local governments. I believe it's time for the Supreme Court to explicitly enumerate to the states that they are no longer able to create fiat laws infringing on that constitutionally protected right. The interpretation of the 2nd Amendment is not a power to be delegated to the states and any laws restricting it's protections are only to come from Congress.
And those laws would be unconstitutional.
Yeah what? Lmao Congress can't pass restrictions on the 2A. That's the job of a Constitutional Convention.
@@seanld444 Yeah what? Yeah but... Congress is the reason you can't own a machine gun without paying a tax.
I don't care anymore - molon labe witch.
Truer words… 😶🇺🇸
It's really too bad there is no provision in the Constitution to expel a state that refuses to comply with all Amendments. I really wish Tom. Thank you for constantly updating what should be a simple don't infringe or you're a new country.
States are America's resources. We should not give them away to leftist takeover. We should take over the leftists, while keeping our states in alignment.
The dangers are for those who oppose us.
All gun owners that I know are very ethical and decent people. The ones going after the only thing keeping US free, have no ethics whatsoever. Evil never sleeps and has no code of conduct.
Thank you for another great video! Keep up the great work.
Many thanks Tom, for your clear and concise expressions. I do very much appreciate your videos. To add, I also follow armed scholar for his videos as well. You and 2-3 others give updates on our 2A situations without much drama. Again, thank you. Subbed, clicked like, and here for the algorithms.
What happens when a state tells the supreme court to "get bent, we don't care about your ruling" and just continues to pass unconstitutional laws? How are those states really going to be forced into compliance?
That's where this country needs to decide wether we are going to follow the Supreme Court, or the 10th Amendment. That is in desperate need of clarification. Sovereignty falls to individual states according to the 10th amendment.
Tom, I have a SERIOUS question.
When will our 2A rights regarding traveling to multiple states be restored? I live in WA state and have a concealed carry permit. I also like to take long road trips across multiple states riding my motorcycle. WA concealed carry permit decides what states I can and cannot carry based on reciprocity laws. I'm an AMERICAN CITIZEN and believe I have the God given right listed as a 2A constitutional right to carry in any state I wish. Will this ever be overturned?
Thanks Tom, from Wisconsin!! 😊
This video doesn't once mention the extreme infringements that have been enacted in 2022 and 2023 in Washington State and Oregon.
-
WA HB 1240 bans ALL semi-auto rifles, regardless of features, and also bans all their parts.
-
Right now it isn't even possible for WA gun owners to buy a replacement part - spring or pin or anything - for an AR, or a threaded barrel, a grip, anything.
Both the WA and OR gun ban statutes have even been rules constitutional by gun prohibitionist judges.
-
The progress of the Washington State, Oregon, and Commiefornia gun ban and mag ban statutes toward the SCOTUS is going to be critical.
Illinois ban too, these laws they are passing out of spite are getting out of hand.
"any Thing in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding." - Article VI, Clause 2, COTUS.
I have to say, as not only an Oregunian, but a far-Left Libertarian Progressive, I was SHOCKED that Oregon passed measure 114. Then I came to my senses and realized that our votes don't really matter and I would wager a year's pay that votes were either suppressed or changed to get it to pass by 0.6%. Sure, there are a bunch of shit-libs here, but I just can't believe that Deschutes County was split 50/50. I've become more and more disillusioned by our voting system and am to the point of believing that it's all theater.
Because those infringements ONLY apply in those states.
I'm so sick of activist judges. This evil has to stop.
USv. Heller was not the only case that stated the 2nd amendment was an individual right. Back in August of 1998 the case of USv. Emerson also stated that the 2nd was an individual right.
Tom you are such a bright guy and are so much help. I appreciate your efforts and videos.
Excellent Perspective, Tom. Thank You!
Keep on keeping on with these videos Tom! Great information!
Super job of breaking down the legal issues. I am 2A all the way and thinks that our founders were wise beyond their time. Sensitive places, gas stations, really? Anywhere we expose ourselves having to open a car door is a point of attack from criminals, carjackers, robbers, and worse, we need to be able to defend ourselves in these places. Everywhere guns are prohibited, is where criminals look to steal them from, just look at the statistics for gun theft from vehicles including unattended police vehicles. Criminals know to stake out courts, post offices, etc. I am for universal national 2A reciprocity! Whatever that takes. We need common sense and logical rulings. More of everything please! Thank you.
How come we never hear what they’re gonna do about criminals in possession of firearms, which is really where the problem lies in the first place
Shut up.. I'm so sick of seeing you super duper freedom advocates talking about that.. Incase you didn't notice, they just manufactured 20 million felons over plastic..
Havard did a study that found the average American commits multiple felonies a month , completely unaware they had ever broken a law.
You all stay crying about how how we should take guns from these people and those people and anybody but us... It's disgusting how slow you are.
They don't want to disarm people with no regard for law and who have evil intentions. They want to disarm good people who try to do their best to be good and peaceful and only want to defend their families and country.
Because foreign and domestic bureaucrats are trying to destroy this country. So far demoralization has been a wild success that would make Mao blush with envy. The subliminal application of their propaganda is on another level.
🙏❤️❤️❤️ Thank you for telling us what's happening to all of us and not just one State.❤❤❤ Keep up the good work❤❤❤
How does the Supreme Court stop the anti-gun laws wholesale rather than ruling on them piecemeal?
I want SCOTUS to call out bad judges that constantly undermined the supreme court. Looking at most of the 9th circuit.
I believe SCOTUS intended to refer to the time of the inclusion of the amendment in 1791. They go on to mention the late 1860's as that was when the 14th amendment was added to make all rights safe from restriction at the state level.
This attorney isn't actually strong enough about gun rights.
A true pro rights interpretation of the 2A deems ALL firearm restriction statutes unconstitutional.
A true pro rights interpretation of the 2A makes it clear that even the notion of "prohibited persons" and age limits are all unconstitutional (didn't even exist federally until 1968)..
A true pro rights interpretation of the 2A makes is clear that the notion of "sensitive places" is also unconstitutional nonsense concocted from whole cloth.
Pursuant to the "plain language" doctrine, nothing in the "shall not be infringed" clause opens the door for any kind of firearm restriction or regulation in any form, period, full stop.
-
Americans need to stop treating the 2A in a second class manner that denies its existence as an inalienable right.
Thank you for starting with big picture over view
Should have kept the 19th century laws at least in Chicago
Explain please
Thank you for your video in clear and easy to understand language.
State of the situation is always appreciated, very rarely do I see it being shown.
Would love to hear the backstory on original gun control, as well as your thoughts on accessories
It's really not that exciting. The first "gun control" laws prohibited the open carry of pistols in towns while the first possession prohibitions were leveled specifically at regional "undesirables" or black people.
The next wave was directed at the confederates after the civil war and was meant mostly to be punitive.
All it really accomplished was creating another excuse to found the Klan and the further codification of arbitrary gun restriction at levels above the municipal where it had been.
It doesn't get "interesting" until the Gen 1 progressives started getting political power in the early 1900's.
That's when the current idea of rights being on a sliding scale based on government desires started popping up.
I might add that the open carry restrictions stand under the current prescribed reading of 2A while the possession prohibitions do NOT due to their roots in racism and cannot be recreated due to ethnic/class exclusion is fundamental to them
I would like to see a video explaining the action of limiting the amount of ammo in a clip or magazine
They wanna make sure we don’t have more bullets then the people that are out to kill us if S H T F
Clip?
The AR15 requires a magazine to function, and every single one that I have purchased came with a 30 round magazine
Don't forget the big brother .308 and/or 6.5 Creedmoor caliber AR10, the larger bore firearm the ignorant gun prohibitionists don't seem to know even exists.
adanac ni ereh ti gnioD .pu yaw ruoy krow ,ra eht htiw tratS
Wow, backwards. Strange
Start with the ar, work there way up. Doing it here in canada
This. The magazine is a part of the firearm required for proper operation, just like the barrel.
Thank you for this informative/disturbing presentation! I'm happy to currently live in Missouri that is a state still holding it's own against anti 2A. Very disturbing things are happing in our fast failing country!
We need to vote out these tyrants and elect people who still support and honor the entire constitution,not just the parts they agree with.
Can't vote out the bad guys cos govt cheets with ballots; you don't have a vote
Or you know, use these 👇
"This Constitution, and laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding." [US Constitution]
"If any statement within any law which is passed, is unconstitutional, the whole law is unconstitutional..." [Marbury v. Madison: 5 US 137 (1803)]
"While an emergency can not create power, and no emergency justifies the violation of any of the provisions of the United States Constitution or States Constitutions, Public emergency, such as economic depression for especially liberal constructions of constitutional powers, has been declared that because of national emergency, it is the policy of the courts of times of national peril, so liberally to construe the special powers vested in the chief executive as to sustain and effectuate the purpose there of, and to that end also more liberally to construe the constituted division and classification of the powers of the coordinated branches of the government and in so far as may not be clearly inconsistent with the constitution." [16 AM Jur 2d., Sec. 98]
"...every man is independent of all laws, except those prescribed by nature. He is not bound by any institutions formed by his fellowman WITHOUT HIS CONSENT.” [Cruden v. Neale]
"The common law is the real law, the Surpeme Law of the Land, the code, rules, regulations, policy and statutes are not the law." [Self v. Rhay, 61 Wn (2d) 261]
"All codes, rules, and regulations are for government authorities only, not human/creators in accordance with God's laws. All codes, rules, and regulations are unconstitutional and lacking due process." [Rodriques v. Ray Donavan (U.S. Department of Labor) 769 F. 2d 1344, 1348 (1985)]
"All laws, rules and practices which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void." [Marbury v. Madison, 5th US (2 Cranch) 137, 174, 176, (1803)]
"...that statutes which would deprive a citizen of the rights of person and property without a regular trail, according to the course and usage of common law, would not be the law of the land." [Hoke v. Henderson, 15, N.C. 15, 25 AM Dec 677]
"No state shall convert a liberty into a license, and charge a fee therefore." [Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105]
"If the State converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee, and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity." [Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham, Alabama, 373 U.S. 262]
"The state cannot diminish rights of the people." [Hurtado v. People of the State of California, 110 U.S. 516]
"The assertion of federal rights, [Bill of Rights] when plainly and reasonably made is not to be defeated under name of local practice." [Davis v. Wechsler, 263 US 22, 24]
"Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them." [Miranda v. Arizona, 384 US 436, 491]
"There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of this exercise or Constitutional rights." [Sherer v. Cullen, 481 F 946]
"The Government of the United States has been emphatically termed a government of laws, and not of men. It will certainly cease to deserve this high appellation if the laws furnished no remedy for violation of a vested legal right." [Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803)]
"Judges Sworn To Obey Constitution Irrespective Of Opinion & Consequences - Constitution Rules over Statues" [AMERICAN JURIS PRUDENCE BOOK 16: CONSTITUTION LAW SECTION]
All of the constitution has always applied to the states as well as the second amendment.
Article 4 section 2 paragraph 1.
Amendment 14 section 1.
Thank you for your coverage. Outstanding presentation and help.
One thing I've never understood. How can government make a list of ineligible people who can't enjoy their God given rights. Especially considering that the 2nd Amendment is the only Amendment that government is allowed to strip
Good stuff, I’m interested in all the topics you mentioned. I’m a Oregon resident and gun owners here are under a fierce attack and at this time it’s unknown if we will perceiver in retaining our 2nd Amendment rights. Thank you for your work.
This 2A rights stuff is just scary! How in the world are criminals ever going to be able to commit horrific acts brutality and commit unspeakable acts of horror on innocent victims if those intended victims are armed? It’s just wrong for criminals and their lifestyles for Americans to have 2A rights!
Basically any of the possible talks you mentioned would be really interesting to watch.
We need to get non repeat felons their Right back! They are treated like second class citizens right now. If you're good enough to be a wage slave, then you're good enough to possess a firearm.
My ex was a convicted felon on a gun charge and child abuse. I would not go anywhere with him alone nor let my child go alone with him even though we were divorced and due to a father's right state, he was granted the right of unsupervised visitation. I did not trust his behavior with out a firearm, yet alone with a firearm, with my child or myself. His felony charge was not his 1st criminal action including a firearm, just the 1st time he was caught and charged. Before he was incarcerated his mental health was evaluated and he was found to be bipolar. After his release, he faced 5 years on probation. He walked a straight line while on paper. The day he was off paper was the day he stopped taking his psych meds and started on a downward slide with more frequent abuse both physically and mentally. Needless to say, he is back in prison for a gun possession charge as a convicted felon. Before anyone should jump on the bandwagon to restore convicted felons gun rights the most important issue is that the nature of the felony must be addressed as to was it any type of domestic violence, gun or lethal use of an object to commit bodily harm, and other charges of that sort. Then the persons mental health must be evaluated preferably by 3 different clinicians, and do they require meds to be a productive and safe person. They should have to have acquired no felonies of any sort for 10 years after their probation time is over. And then a evaluation on an individual case should be determined. The same restoration of gun rights cannot be the same for every felon. It MUST be on am individual case, as long as the person successfully meets all the criteria.
@sds5502 I had a felony 2 decades ago for theft in Illinois. There is NO WAY to get my rights back through their process unless you have money to grease the right people. If you are allowed to be in public, then you deserve ALL your rights as a human being under God. You can't go PRE crime and try to predict what people will do. You need more harsher sentences for certain crimes and proper evaluations before release. Not making someone a second class citizen and leaving them defenseless after paying their debt. You are wrong, and it's un-American.
i was married to a crazy wife in 2002 my X wife throw a empty wine bottle at me like iny other time the pigs come out and the guy i goes to jail i went to court i was not as smart back then then i im now i took a misdeminer 10 year ban on firearms i never had fierarms at the house because i did not trust her remember i have a 1 and a 2 year old at this time its been 21 years since that happend i went to go buy a gun they said i was denied because of 922g.9 to this day i got full custody of the kids they figuerd out she was lieing
Two arguments in play here: non-violent felons should have full RKBA restored once they have served their time. Violent felons, as we see over and over again, have a lot of difficulty avoiding repeating such behavior once they're out. Their cases must be carefully evaluated, and we must err on the side of continued suspension of RKBA. I don't like that, but I reason that a violent felon who gets his or her RKBA back then commits a crime with a firearm is a very bad look for 2A. If that same felon does _not_ get his or her RKBA restored, and commits a crime with a firearm, the anti-2A crowd cannot blame 2A. I would argue that if a felon is deemed unworthy of RKBA restoration, he or she should probably remain incarcerated.
@rangersmith4652 Exactly, I said in my original comment, "Non repeat," felons. Also, harsher sentences for violent crimes, as well as psychological evaluations before release. It's going to be an imperfect system, but you can't try to force evil from existence by punishing someone who's been reformed.
Maybe I'm a public policy nerd; but I really love these videos.
I think a video on the absurd (historical) case law which tried to disarm various groups would be most interesting!
Excellent work, Tom.
Thank you for a clear and concise, as possible, explanation of where we are at. I would welcome a deeper dive on all of the 5, possibly with a video of each.
I also would appreciate where we can download that anti 2A playbook you referenced.
Lastly is it possible that short barrel rifles might be taken out of the NFA altogether. I appreciate that Congress very well may have intend to do what they did. It seemed to me they wanted handguns but the push back didn't allow that and SBR were something of a consolation prize. Even given legislative intent, Congress still can't sweep aside the rights that we had that the 2nd like the others restrained the government not the people. I became disable after serving more than 35 years in EMS. I am headed towards being confined to a wheelchair and a AR pistol is the really only practical weapon, other than handguns that can be carried with any hope of being even somewhat concealed and manipulated. I am about as handy with a pistol than the next guy, that is I can probably hit the broadside of a barn. A rifle on the other hand I can hit a man sized target in any event I can think of for defense of myself, my family or the innocent.
Thanks Steven!
there should be no prohibited persons. If you commit a crime you go to jail or prison where your rights are restrained but never stripped from you so as soon as you walk out of jail or prison you still have your rights fully intact. If you're not safe enough to have a gun then you're not safe enough to be walking around in public.
age to purchase and carry ALL firearms should be 17. Most people probably drive by then or are of legal age to potentially get a full driver's license and therefore have the right to protect themselves while they are away from their parents' protection. If the age of majority is going to be 21 then enlisting in the military, getting credit cards/loans, voting, etc should be 21 as well.
What is an ordinary firearm? Any firearm that is mainstream by a reputable company, is in citizens' hands for all lawful purposes, and any that the government agencies/military possesses. PLUS, we're not restricted to ordinary firearms to begin with. It is ARMS. Short for military armaments- anything the military uses for offensive or defensive purposes. PERIOD. The only thing that should not be covered is nondiscriminate weapons of mass destruction that even the government shouldn't be allowed to own: nukes, chemical, and biological weapons.
sensitive places: capital buildings etc where liberals could walk in and shoot everyone. Courtrooms as well because of the emotionally charged atmosphere. We also need laws that say all private companies open to the public are bound by the 2nd amendment as well. There should be a distinction between private property rights as for as a private residential home that can restrict firearms vs private companies open to the public (with or without a membership.) Also, no workplace can say no guns allowed especially while locked up in your vehicle and if it was up to me they couldnt even restrict it in the buildings unless it was maybe a nuclear facility or somewhere where idk maybe molten metal like welding could melt a glock and possibly make a round go off. schools should not be allowed to be sensitive places. we've been doing that and look at the results. stop the stupidity.
open carry of any firearm should be legal and federally protected in all 50 states. criminals, cowards, and those ashamed of what they are doing hide their actions. Any swatting, false reporting and causing a panic etc should have a mandatory sentence of 20 years in prison.
It is time to strip qualified and absolute immunity from cops, judges, lawmakers, etc. If a cop draws his firearm when he/she has not been shot at or threatened with deadly force at a minimum they should be fired and have some sort of permanent record that keeps them from ever working in an official capacity even as an unarmed guard with a private company much less a government agency. If they point a gun at someone who has not pointed a gun, shot at them, or have been threatened with a credible deadly weapon then they should immediately be charged with assault with a deadly weapon with a minimum sentence of 20 years. If they shoot or shoot at someone in those circumstances they should immediately be charged with attempted murder and have to face a jury of anti-cops to prove their innocence.
We need a court specifically run by we the people who have authority over judges, lawmakers, and cops. Any time an unconstitutional gun law is making its way through the courts it could be struck down permanently by this court. This court may even strike down the supreme court and reprimand ANY government official. They will have the authority to arrest anti gun governors and try them in citizens court for conspiracy and treason. On top of that gun control laws are permanently frozen. ANY new gun control law must be approved by the citizens court before it can be written into law. Who runs/qualifies for this court? gun tubers, cop watchers and pretty much any anti-government pro freedom constitution-loving American who has a recorded history of their beliefs in the public eye.
We somehow need to add a constitutional amendment to the bill of rights that simply states: NO VICTIM? NO CRIME!
i could go on and on but this is long enough....
As I consider the vast and still growing sea of 2-A coverage, your views and analysis are clearly superior. Thank You Tom!
I don't know if you seen this, On Patrol Live , in California, an police office had a pistol with thread barrel and he was saying is was a Assault Weapon because it was threaded. He was looking up the California code too charge him.
"Prohibited possessors" is unconstitutional.
I would really enjoy a sit down with you, for a thorough look into words and meanings in the Constitution. Not just our present 2A battle.
Thanks Tom, for your expertise and legalsplaining extraordinar
Great stuff, thanks.
And, of course...
Bite me TH-cam algorithm!
Do a video on accessories. I live in a jurisdiction that considers "materials for the manufacture of arms" as "arms" and prohibits their possession without a license. They deny every license application under local law because the local law doesn't provide for licenses for the materials for manufacture, only .22 rifles and standard caliber shotguns (not their parts). It's a roundabout way of banning 80% lowers. FYI, this is in the unincorporated territory of American Samoa. The AG's office here has said it's questionable whether the 2A even applies here. The Dept. of Interior administers the territory but allows the local government to pass laws of local application. The local gov't has passed laws banning handguns also, despite Heller. Lots there, I know, but a video on accessories would be very helpful as it relates to the Vanderstok case on 80% lowers.
Exactly what is a "prohibited possessor"?
Did Gatling guns have restrictions? If not then full auto should be allowed.
Most government building have prescreening before entry (by armed people) but schools are mostly undefended. They are sitting targets. Schools need to be either protected by armed security OR adults allowed to carry as a deterrent.
My state, Maine, is a Constitutional Carry State. There are still some particulars with “constitutional carry” with which I disagree - certain “sensitive areas” and the exclusion of felons. We all know that certain sensitive areas may result in one becoming a “sitting duck”.
On the subject of felons, one who commits a crime is issued a sentence. Once that sentence is complete, one has theoretically paid their debt to society. One should not have to go through the rest of one’s life with a label slapped on them. One should also not be denied the right to defend one’s self or one’s family. I realize this is a sensitive subject, and I personally feel that there are certain crimes which should be subject to firearm prohibition. (These all have to do with violent crimes against another human being or animal.) Most men and women in our penal system, or that have been through our penal system, are non-violent offenders. If someone commits a crime with a motor vehicle, their state may remove their license to drive for a time. They may be required to take a driving course to have their license reinstated. If one commits a felony with a motor vehicle, their license is reinstated, but they are labeled a felon for the rest of their life, and cannot carry a firearm. Where is the sense in that. If someone commits forgery and goes to prison, they cannot carry a fire arm. We all know I can go on with this in for quite a while. This is egregious and nonsensical. But then again, most of the laws in this country don’t seem to make a whole lot of sense anymore. We all need to stand up and demand that changes are made.
I’d like to hear your view on the ATF and what they’re doing to the FFL’s especially the small kitchen table FFL in Oklahoma where one agent said tell your friends that were coming to shut down gun shows. Thank you for all your doing.
Included in SCOTUS Bruen decision was a Concurring Opinion by Justice Alito, wherein he says…
"Our holding decides nothing about who may lawfully possess a firearm or the requirements that must be met to buy a gun. Nor does it decide anything about the kinds of weapons that people may possess."
It seems to me that second sentence left open an avenue for anti-gunners to propose bans on AR (and related) types of long guns. What is your read on Alito's Concurring Opinion?
Thanks Tom
Exactly! Individual rights!
Very good video! Concise assessment put very straight forward!
One point on prohibited persons and "history and tradition":
I believe this point is HUGE, yet I haven't seen anyone else seize upon this point.
That is, the anti-gunners are attempting to come up with creative, obscure, examples of prohibited persons laws in the 19th century, yet I contend that none really exist. I feel that the point is proven by the fact that even in the late 19th century one could walk into a Sears and Roebuck's and purchase any weapon of choice, no questions asked, and if ANY prohibited persons laws existed at the time, this simply wouldn't be the case.
As I said, in my opinion, this is HUGE. Perhaps I'm delusional and it's not that important. If I am, I would like to know. I have ran this argument by various forums, etc., and it doesn't seem to pick up legs. If you're reading this and would be so kind as to offer your opinion, I'm all ears, and open to your thoughts.
It is beyond praiseworthy that a knowledgeable, articulate attorney should spend his time analyzing these considerations and presenting them to us laymen in terms we can understand. Mr. Grieve, I salute you.
Thank you.
This is a spot on channel. Language from an attorney that isn’t riddled with technical lawyer jargon that I can’t understand, unlike the other lawyer guy who shall remain nameless.
There are several TH-cam lawyer talking about this stuff.
Very interesting… thanks Tom
You have Taught me so much=Thank you for so many GREAT Videos.
Also you are a fantastic speaker and presenter.
What "penalty/deterrence" is there for lower courts that ignore SCOTUS regarding Bruen, Heller, McDonald, etc? Is there any "discipline" for politicians, other than voting them out?
Thank you for your video. I would like to see an extended video on the pros and cons of being a gun owner. I am referring to having a gun for personal protection. I do not have any prior experience with guns.
Tom, Yes Please do a video on the Anti-2A Playbook. That would be a lesson straight out of The Art of War.
Thank you Tom for this video. What's sad is that a video like this is necessary. But it is.
To all modern anti-gun advocates that claim accessories to firearms are not covered by the 2A, that is ridiculous. How could it have been possible in the historical context since the 1700's and 1800's when up to the start of the U.S. Civil War, most common firearms had been muzzleloader, single shot flintlocks and caplocks that REQUIRE accessories to function, such as ramrods and flint or percussion caps? So of course accessories to firearms are included in the 2A as being protected items, even up to the current era of 21st century firearms that are in common use today.
My state's, New Mexico, legislature is looking at several get around to SCOTUS's rulings. I'd like you to review such. Also, what about older laws, e.g., NFA and New York's Sullivan law?
You are on top of the issues, which will no doubt keep coming. You are truly appreciated
Good information, thank you. Enjoy the content you always bring out..
Excelent information I do support the 2A and I am NRA member for many years
Yes, cover the playbook!
Thanks for the short, detailed summary. Look forward to more details and thoughts from you in general. I understand time was limited.
Yes I’d love to hear more about that Professor’s playbook
I'd like to see something on magazines. My thought is that the weapon can not work without one, so it shouldn't be considered an accessory as it's a vital part of the assembly.
Covering the play book for anti-2A parties would help give the firearm community an idea what we will be up against (their logic and arguments) so a strong defense can be created and implemented.
Thank you for the great video and advice. We have a great idea man/2A attorney here in our state: Mitch Vilos.
Thanks for your perspective on vital civil rights.
Great insights, thank you! I am very interested in all of the "more details" you referred to.
This would be a great beginning to a 2A series. News, update etc.
Thanks Tom!! Another great video with lots of topics to think about.
It would be helpful to know from a legal perspective whether it is helpful and wise to obtain an FFL or is it a legal risk an unwise? In the old days everyone in my circles was trying to get one as it made purchasing firearms and other related products easier. It was believed among my circles that the ATF was fearful of people doing exactly that, and as prevention they were requiring storefronts or other expensive overhead to discourage people from becoming FFL holders. In your video about “are you a dealer” you read different cases where it was necessary for a person to obtain an FFL based on making a profit for example with no requirements for storefronts or any other overhead, just, it seemed, file out the application jump through a few hoops and pay the fee. Would you please clarify? Thanks for all you are doing for us, and please keep up the good work.
I think there's one 'dark horse' subject that not a lot of people are talking about. We can argue about the Constitutionality of various gun control law till we are all blue in the face, but what happens when NON-public entities keep you from acquiring arms, parts, or ammunition? Although not strictly a firearms issue, I had one of my credit card companies refuse to allow a transaction to go through from an online ammo dealer. Now, we ALL know about how the Federal government was working with Big Tech companies to suppress free speech on social media platforms. We ALSO know that the ATF and IRS are harassing businesses that deal in 2A related products.
Meanwhile, there have been several 2A related companies who have basically been shut down because the banking institutions they were using unilaterally (and in at least one case, WITHOUT WARNING) refused to continue doing business with them. 2A related businesses NEED access to banking services to STAY in business. Likewise, we as individuals would find it hard to purchase 2A related products without access to banking services. There is nothing to stop ALL banks and credit card companies from restricting their customers from being able to uses their credit and debit cards to purchase firearms, parts, and ammunition. And, without SIGNIFICANT proof, there would be no way to tie those restrictions to governmental entities (nod nod, wink wink), thereby BYPASSING any Constitutionality issues. As I stated above, this has actually already happened to me once. And I know for a fact that it has happened to others.
And now, with CBDCs on the horizon, your access to your OWN money could be severely restricted for ANY reason that the powers-that-be decide. When (not IF) THAT happens, you can kiss any thoughts of fighting these measures on Constitutionality grounds goodbye.
Great summary video. I'd call it a landmark reference video, one to be saved for watching multiple times.