JOIN GROUND NEWS TODAY Break free from media manipulation and stay informed on breaking news by subscribing through my link ground.news/washington to get 40% off unlimited access with the Vantage Subscription.
Conservative voter turnout is ESSENTIAL this year! Democrats are so desparate they'll vote for this dog in high numbers....plus cheating. We need turnout to overcome those obstacles.
Right once they learn the price of admission is one soul they will start to understand. We just have to be willing to accept payment and no I can't break change.
You do know that the term “assault rifle” was pushed by the firearms industry to sell more semi automatic rifles, right? You DO know that, don’t you? To be clear: I don’t want them banned.
If someone is in favor of infringing on the right to keep and bear arms, they are not liberal, they are authoritarian, probably collective centralists.
The Supreme Court needs to get off its ass and settle this government overreach once and for all! I’m tired of these people cherry picking what god given rights we can exercise!!
Like those student loans huh? You dont realize they can rule anything they want. Without an arm of law enforcement that goes out and arrests and charges people that refuse to comply it means nothing. Were under a dictatorship of tyranny and a banana republic. They dont have to honor scotus rulings just like California and other states. Thats why they orchestrated jan 6 to label any dissent as right wing domestic terrorism. The arm of the law thats supposed to enforce through dissent is we the people. They gutted that. Effectively.
😂not gonna work or happen they have a nwo that they want and they aint gonna let noone stop them we have to actually fight thats what its coming to plus states just ignore supreme court rulings today they completely ignore them u know cause whos gonna arreat them and the citizens are to pussy to do there duty and stand up
The same supreme court that says civil forfeiture is totally ok and not a violation of the constitution? The same supreme court that openly accepts bribes?
Actually the gun clubs need to get off their ashes as they haven't taken a case with standing since Heller in 2008....Oh wait, there's no money in getting gun rights settled too soon...Gotta keep the pockets of the gun club chiefs full of that green stuff.
When I heard that the Bruen case had turned out so well, I thought that the Gun Bans across America would start dropping like flies. That hasn’t been the case, especially after what New York did. My heart sank. The Bruen case hasn’t made as big a dent as I thought it would. So disappointing.
Never underestimate the anti-rights crowd. They are determined to eliminate our rights, numerous and creative. Expect them to find or make loopholes against any ruling. This may sound fatalistic, but it simply means we cannot rest on our laurels. We have come a long way over last couple decades and there are many opportunities to move forward from here so buckle up and fight-fight-fight.
Unconstitutional State Governments simply ignore SCOTUS decisions because the Court has no way to enforce its decisions. If a President could enforce the rulings with US Marshals and Federalized National Guard troops by arresting State legislators, Mayors and Governors and putting them in Federal Prison like they did in Maryland during the Civil War, that could be a solution.
Eh, the Democratic People's Republic of Maryland started issuing out carry permits, so there is that. Now that their assault weapon ban has been upheld, time for the Supreme Court to dick slap that law into oblivion
Please never dumb down your content. It is a perfect mix of short and informative. You explain the reality of firearms infringements as they are, and don’t just spend 10 minutes saying “rah rah 2nd amendment”. Keep it up!
In my experience, a MG definitely enhances the efficiency of the militia and is, therefore, an arm protected by the 2A (re. U.S. v. Miller, (1939). Furthermore, they're bearable arms. (Heller v. D.C. (2008). Additionally, they fit the descriptions of two of the founders regarding the "arms" they were guaranteeing to each American: "Arms usual in the regular service" and "every terrible implement of the soldier." - Thomas Jefferson and Tench Coxe, respectively.
How about crew served machine guns, like theM1917? Yeah, Basilone (Sp?) hand carried one, on Guadalcanal, but it didn't have the water cooling feature and he did as an expediency, burning his hands.
The elephant in the room is why does the government fight so hard and expeditiously in all these 2a infringement cases but never on the other ones that matter. Like securing our borders. That should be all you need to know as surely this has never been about safety. The prosecution fell asleep at the wheel because they just expected to win this case. That's how bad its gotten.
...if an Officer ever asks you, " _Give me ONE good reason why I shouldn't place you under Arrest_ ": ...then ask him if he's ever arrested an illegal alien specifically for violating Immigration Law !!! ...if not, then he clearly _CAN_ use his "discretion" to not arrest for whatever petty law is in question. ...of course, if the Officer is *_Mexican,_* then it's probably just going to piss him off !!!
I thought it was funny that the ATF objected about returning 11k FRTs saying it was too onerous. Yet, collecting the names of millions of brace owners was going to be no problem at all.
How does a court dismiss the validity of a right? How can they, without valid grounds, say that the right doesn't cover this (because we say it is so??) and then overtly infringe on that right? Doing this with our own money and endlessly appealing, etc. It is the definition of tyranny, is it not?
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed". I don't see any if's and's or but's in that statement I do see "shall not be infringed"
@@conscript900 That argument already been had, my man! Now the crux is getting the lower courts to listen! Anyway according to SCOTUS own precedent the machine gun ban should go down. So I don't see why it would be denied cert if the appeals court reverses. In fact if the appeals court reverses and SCOTUS doesn't grant cert, then the Heller decision ain't worth the paper it's printed on to the Supreme Court itself... and the "country of laws, not men" is going to men. In a hurry.
Anything and everything that can be used offensively or defensively counts as "arms." The 2A covers ALL ARMS. Therefore, declaring anything to be outside the protection of the 2A is just like dismissing a case due to "lack of standing." It's a big, cowardly action to avoid making a decision.
Get arrested and create standing...You'd think that from the 2008 Heller case, just one of the 100 million gun owning chest pounders, would have done that for the AW's or open/concealed carry without a license, but NOPE, not a single one.
@@investigativeoutcomes9343 The "government" hates the very idea that "the people" could be able to do exactly what the 2A intended...have the ability to overthrow it!
I think people should have to pay a ton of money to express certain views or say certain words that are scary. Someone tell me why it can't be done for the 1A when it's done for the 2A.
@darronlewark6504 Yes the enemy within. The people who own a 40,000 dollar machine gun. Don't want to see them now worth 800.00 So they hope machine guns are never on ever gun shops shelf. For anyone to purchase.
The supply is capped and there's unlimited demand. That's the only reason they are expensive you could get those guns for a few hundred when they came out.
This isn't the NFA though. It is just the Hughes amendment. I'm betting we will see this ultimately prevail with a ruling that says "NFA fine, new machine gun ban not."
We can't buy an AR or a pistol with a threaded barrel either and you have to wait 10 days to get a 22 LR single shot Chipmunk for your kid to learn on.
It means we wait and watch. It's going to be appealed, and then there's always that bit about the ATF ignoring pesky laws and judicial rulings they don't agree with. It would take SCOTUS chiming in, Trump as President, and the ATF completely abolished before I'd think of rushing out to buy one.
What makes a machine gun "dangerous and unusual"? Most would say its capable fast rate of fire. However the Cargill decision highlighted the fact that ROF has zero bearing on what a machine gun is. So if ROF can't been weighed on the "Dangerous and Unusual" scale of what is a machine gun, then how else are machine guns able to be regulated. This will be an interesting case to follow for sure!
Until the Shall not be infringed clause has been changed through the Constitutionally required processes into a Shall not be infringed, except for...clause. None of the firearm regulations have any Constitutionally valid authorizations. Congress had zero authority to enact any of them.
I agree no gun platform should be illegal for the common individual. However don't leave out the "well regulated milita" part and that would be for the government to make laws that keep a well regulated milita. That does mean reasonable laws such as violent fellons not being legally allowed to posses a gun or to require reasonable training to posses guns like taking hunter safty or concealed carry course to be well trained and regulated.
@@mgallus Well regulated in the terminology of the time was much more like a well regulated double barrel shotgun, meaning that both barrels worked together towards the same point of aim. It had absolutely nothing to do with government interventions.
@Vibe77Guy the purpose of the government is to govern the founding father knew that and understood that... you don't and yes keeping gun from people who are unable to reasonably handle guns is keeping a well regulated milita. It has noting to do with personal regulation but the government setting proper laws in order to keep a well regulated milita. I will state laws that ban any gun platform are unconstitutional but laws that keep a malita well regulated are not unconstitutional unless they go too far like red flag laws.
@@mgallus yah, thats not what, "well regulated" means. Back then every fighting age male had to have a certain amount of power and lead for their muskets by law. They made sure that the citizens had what they needed to fight off another attack and that the govt knew they could count on them to take action against the enemy. Thats what well regulated means...
The only thing it means to me is I've wasted a bunch of time watching youtube videos of people salivating and pretending the end of the NFA is just around the corner. Thanks for bringing some sanity back into it.
Thank you for always having timely and realistic analysis for us on these issues. It's invaluable to be able to watch a few minute video and receive an expert explanation on how our rights are being jeopardized and what we can do about it.
On August 23rd, the California Department of Justice (DOJ) released a notice of proposed rulemaking to increase the cost of the Ammunition Eligibility Check to $5.00 per authorization, a 500% increase over the existing fee of $1.00. This proposed increase comes on the heels of the legislature passing Assembly Bill 135 and Senate Bill 135 last year to allow the Attorney General to unilaterally increase the fee to conduct these checks, thereby potentially allowing costs to skyrocket over time due to bureaucratic inefficiency. Public comments will be accepted on the proposed rule until October 8th at 5:00pm
Brilliant video. Lots of channels trumpet the ruling, but you have the clarity to break down the reality. Rulings dont happen in a vacuum, and by explaining the circumstances around the ruling, it helps us (non-lawyers) understand it more deeply, as well as how it most likely will (or will not) impact the average citizen. Like you said, there is always interplay between politics and the legal system. Well done on explaining this ruling. Thank you! Its why I keep hitting "play" when I see you posted a new video, even if other channels have covered the topic!
We need more channels like this that actually know how to interpret the legal language and truthfully convey what is actually happening and likely to happen. It gets old seeing the same click bait garbage… . Keep up the good work and keeping us informed.
H.R. 11654 specifically states that if the United States Military has it, the Government has to make it available to all law abiding citizens for a reasonable price. this includes all weapons, vehicles, and other equipment.
One thing it means is, that in some places in Kansas, having a Federal Public Defender is an awesome attorney to have when being charged with possession of a machine gun. I wish I could remember his/her name to give them the props they deserve.
Someone in my area and I called the police about and the police are cool about it, has a 50 caliber machine gun that he only shoots on New Years. The police told me this 50 caliber machine gun is mounted on a permanent concrete pad and no danger to the public. A beautiful sound to listen to on New Years.
Greetings from the Peoples Republic of Illinois. Amazing how totalitarian states can remove inalienable rights from their subjects and it takes years of court fights to get a chance of getting them back while at the same time free states restore inalienable rights and yet again it takes years of court fighting to get them back. Is it just me or is there a trend here?
I own seven transferable Machineguns I bought in the early 90’s when they were still affordable. I would love to be able to form 1 a Machinegun again. But I won’t count on it.
that's what gets me. They talk about keeping these "weapons of war" out of our hands....but then they leave ACTUAL weapons of war to be taken be ACTUAL bad people who will then distribute them to every bad person they know. Disgusting
What does it mean for the court system in the USA? Answer: Hot potato!!!! How to play 'Hot Potato: Standing in the circle, pass the beanbag or ball around the circle, while music plays in the background. If anyone drops the ball, they can pick it up and keep playing. When the music stops, the person holding the 'hot potato' is out. Keep going until there's only one person left, who can be declared the winner!
I agree with your assessment, but there is problem. In overturning the long-standing Roe v. Wade, the reasoning was "The Constitution makes no express reference to a right to obtain an abortion…," the June 24 ruling said. "We thus return the power to weigh those arguments to the people and their elected representatives." Now we come to the 2nd Amendment about which the Constitution has something to say, indeed a powerful command "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” so if we applied the same logic from the Roe decision it would seem that the only authority the federal government has is in protecting the right and at all levels of government. Good vid.
I just checked this case for updates. The appeal was just filed this past Friday, September 20th, 2024 for those reading in the future. The defense will get a certain amount of time to respond, likely 30-90 days. That will put it near or past the election, and only after the defense responds will a date for the appeal be put on the calendar. By that point, it should be after January 20th. Assuming Trump as back in office, what happens if his DOJ simply drops the appeal, and lets Judge Broomes' decision stand?
Thank you SO MUCH my dear fellow, for ADMITTING that the Rule of Law does NOT actually exist at the Appellate Level! Your profession is bankrupt sir, and you've just proven that as fact! Thank you for your hard work. Cheers from the Oil Patch in Central WY
Elect Trump and watch the price of ammo come right back down. As he un handicaps the manufacturers and lifts the ban on imports and stops the alphabet agencies from stockpiling everything available to create shortages. This is all government created pricing and can be undone just as quickly if DJT would get a pro-2A advisor. (Not likely but who knows) To your point.. I'd be happy with even a burst mode. Is it wrong???🤷🏻♂️
Thanks for the very well-communicated description of the practical realities of this finding. And in terms of practical reality I would personally be FINE with machine guns staying on the NFA -- IF we could get rid of the Hughes amendment, so that we could have modern, newly-built machine guns....at reasonable prices as well.
I am sure there would be a hot trot in Olympia to specifically ban full auto if the lower court ruling is upheld (if full auto is not already banned specifically in state), but in the interim could you imagine the absurdity of owning a full auto but not being allowed to own a bump stock? 🤔
So then... we shouldn't all be submitting eForm 1s for MGs this week and citing this case, and then collectively using the denials as grounds for a lawsuit? Booooo.
If we want to take down the NFA, we need to first reverse the holding in _Miller._ After that, we need to target the horrible overbroad precedent set in _Wickard v. Filburn_ (1942), which will enable us to tackle remaining firearms laws that hinge on the Interstate Commerce Clause.
Marberry vs. Madison 1803 There exists NO LICENSE to practice law in this country! A bar card isn't a license issued by a monoly. If a bar card is a license.... show me how and by what authority! A lot of legal weight is given to the aba.... but back the bus up and look where and how it started. It wasn't by and through congress.
In Supreme Court Docket Case # 22-1124, which states that machinegun and silencer kits are machineguns and silencers per statute and case law, why then, does the Supreme Court and the DOJ allow the machineguns and the silencers to continue to be sold illegally to the public? Are we not a country of laws?
I’m no lawyer, but I said the same thing. I’ll go one further, and predict that some democrat will use this ruling (and the enthusiasm surrounding the case) as a sounding board to seek roll backs of recent Supreme Court rulings, or to justify packing the court. These people are not stupid, and again, I am no lawyer, but if I thought of it, you can can bet that some anti-2A fanatic either already has, or soon will think about it as well.
The biggest losers to an actual repeal of machine gun ban would be people who currently own transferable machine guns. Especially no name brand AR lowers that were pinned for an auto sear 40 years ago. Those things would lose 99% of their value overnight.
The people who bought them for their value, or bought them and then valued their market price over their right to the tools themselves, never valued our rights to begin with. We don’t care about them.
Yep, the heuristic approach, namely that the politicians and courts will never permit mere serfs to have automatic weapons, does count for far more than detailed legal analyses, which themselves are based on the mistaken belief that courts actually state the true reasons for why they decide as they do. Experience is a wonderful teacher.
When I went through the court record, this case was really strange, and a couple of things stand out that make this different from 99.99% of all machinegun cases I've reade about in the last 20 years. 1.) Tamori Morgan doesn't appear to have a record of any other arrest in Kansas. 2.) The two charges and indictement for possessing the weapons occured weeks before his arrest. That is way different than pulling over a drug dealer or doing a vehicle stop and discovering a machine gun. Again that is the majority of the machinegun cases. Neither is there a charge or allegation that Mr. Morgan was selling or trying to sell a maching gun, which is likely the rest of the cases. It makes me wonder if this was information gained by someone facing charges who knew about Mr. Morgans guns and turned over evidence to the ATF/FBI. 3.) I read the DOJ Brief, its weak. 4.) The court went out of its way to only apply the analysis to Mr. Morgan's case. Why would the DOJ appeal the case and not just take the L for presenting a poor case? I'm curious in the governments filings why there isn't more info on the weapon. They entered one photo showing just the selector settings and none of the internals. How do we know that it is fall auto? Did the manufacturer actually make those, how did it get to Mr. Morgan? ( www.courtlistener.com/docket/67222373/33/1/united-states-v-morgan/) Last thougth. The DOJ could appeal, win, then drop the charges. (Likely with the weapons being disposed of between the win and the drop.)
Miller vs US 1939 upheld that militia weapons are constitutional, only short barreled shotguns had no militia use. US Army does use short barrel shotguns today ie M26 MASS.
JOIN GROUND NEWS TODAY
Break free from media manipulation and stay informed on breaking news by subscribing through my link ground.news/washington to get 40% off unlimited access with the Vantage Subscription.
No way will these criminals allow us serfs to have full access to our rights.
Sad but true
Lol you don’t allow them to control your rights. If you’re not willing to take what’s yours then you don’t deserve to have it.
Stop asking permission
Conservative voter turnout is ESSENTIAL this year! Democrats are so desparate they'll vote for this dog in high numbers....plus cheating. We need turnout to overcome those obstacles.
Right once they learn the price of admission is one soul they will start to understand. We just have to be willing to accept payment and no I can't break change.
News headline “Libs calling AR-15 assault weapons backfires as assault rifles are legalized”
You do know that the term “assault rifle” was pushed by the firearms industry to sell more semi automatic rifles, right? You DO know that, don’t you?
To be clear: I don’t want them banned.
If someone is in favor of infringing on the right to keep and bear arms, they are not liberal, they are authoritarian, probably collective centralists.
The Supreme Court needs to get off its ass and settle this government overreach once and for all! I’m tired of these people cherry picking what god given rights we can exercise!!
Like those student loans huh? You dont realize they can rule anything they want. Without an arm of law enforcement that goes out and arrests and charges people that refuse to comply it means nothing. Were under a dictatorship of tyranny and a banana republic. They dont have to honor scotus rulings just like California and other states. Thats why they orchestrated jan 6 to label any dissent as right wing domestic terrorism. The arm of the law thats supposed to enforce through dissent is we the people. They gutted that. Effectively.
😂not gonna work or happen they have a nwo that they want and they aint gonna let noone stop them we have to actually fight thats what its coming to plus states just ignore supreme court rulings today they completely ignore them u know cause whos gonna arreat them and the citizens are to pussy to do there duty and stand up
That's because they believe they are your God!
The same supreme court that says civil forfeiture is totally ok and not a violation of the constitution? The same supreme court that openly accepts bribes?
Actually the gun clubs need to get off their ashes as they haven't taken a case with standing since Heller in 2008....Oh wait, there's no money in getting gun rights settled too soon...Gotta keep the pockets of the gun club chiefs full of that green stuff.
When I heard that the Bruen case had turned out so well, I thought that the Gun Bans across America would start dropping like flies. That hasn’t been the case, especially after what New York did. My heart sank. The Bruen case hasn’t made as big a dent as I thought it would. So disappointing.
You seem like a glass completely full kind of person 😂
Never underestimate the anti-rights crowd. They are determined to eliminate our rights, numerous and creative. Expect them to find or make loopholes against any ruling.
This may sound fatalistic, but it simply means we cannot rest on our laurels. We have come a long way over last couple decades and there are many opportunities to move forward from here so buckle up and fight-fight-fight.
Unconstitutional State Governments simply ignore SCOTUS decisions because the Court has no way to enforce its decisions. If a President could enforce the rulings with US Marshals and Federalized National Guard troops by arresting State legislators, Mayors and Governors and putting them in Federal Prison like they did in Maryland during the Civil War, that could be a solution.
It will help in time.
Eh, the Democratic People's Republic of Maryland started issuing out carry permits, so there is that. Now that their assault weapon ban has been upheld, time for the Supreme Court to dick slap that law into oblivion
Please never dumb down your content. It is a perfect mix of short and informative. You explain the reality of firearms infringements as they are, and don’t just spend 10 minutes saying “rah rah 2nd amendment”. Keep it up!
In my experience, a MG definitely enhances the efficiency of the militia and is, therefore, an arm protected by the 2A (re. U.S. v. Miller, (1939). Furthermore, they're bearable arms. (Heller v. D.C. (2008). Additionally, they fit the descriptions of two of the founders regarding the "arms" they were guaranteeing to each American: "Arms usual in the regular service" and "every terrible implement of the soldier." - Thomas Jefferson and Tench Coxe, respectively.
How about crew served machine guns, like theM1917? Yeah, Basilone (Sp?) hand carried one, on Guadalcanal, but it didn't have the water cooling feature and he did as an expediency, burning his hands.
We fought our revolution with cannon owned by individuals, that is "the precedent" when we choose to live on it.
@@jason60chev full auto ar15 sbr will do just fine.
This case highlights just how much the federal government resists loosening restrictions, even when the Constitution seems to be on our side.
The elephant in the room is why does the government fight so hard and expeditiously in all these 2a infringement cases but never on the other ones that matter. Like securing our borders. That should be all you need to know as surely this has never been about safety. The prosecution fell asleep at the wheel because they just expected to win this case. That's how bad its gotten.
It is because they hate us and dispossess the Founding stock.
...if an Officer ever asks you, " _Give me ONE good reason why I shouldn't place you under Arrest_ ":
...then ask him if he's ever arrested an illegal alien specifically for violating Immigration Law !!!
...if not, then he clearly _CAN_ use his "discretion" to not arrest for whatever petty law is in question.
...of course, if the Officer is *_Mexican,_* then it's probably just going to piss him off !!!
I thought it was funny that the ATF objected about returning 11k FRTs saying it was too onerous. Yet, collecting the names of millions of brace owners was going to be no problem at all.
because they do what the smol hats tell them to do. money is their weapon.
How does a court dismiss the validity of a right? How can they, without valid grounds, say that the right doesn't cover this (because we say it is so??) and then overtly infringe on that right? Doing this with our own money and endlessly appealing, etc. It is the definition of tyranny, is it not?
They can do it because they have, at their beck and call, many thousands of armed thugs who do their bidding for pay, pensions, and benefits.
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed". I don't see any if's and's or but's in that statement I do see "shall not be infringed"
They will aruge what is actually infringing and what well regulated actually means. They like to play word games all day.
@@conscript900 That argument already been had, my man! Now the crux is getting the lower courts to listen! Anyway according to SCOTUS own precedent the machine gun ban should go down. So I don't see why it would be denied cert if the appeals court reverses. In fact if the appeals court reverses and SCOTUS doesn't grant cert, then the Heller decision ain't worth the paper it's printed on to the Supreme Court itself... and the "country of laws, not men" is going to men. In a hurry.
@@conscript900and they know what there doing its on purpose
@@conscript900 as I am sure you know, well regulated refers to "well trained" and nothing more!
@@ericdincauze3984 no, it applies to the militia which is regulated by congress.
Anything and everything that can be used offensively or defensively counts as "arms." The 2A covers ALL ARMS. Therefore, declaring anything to be outside the protection of the 2A is just like dismissing a case due to "lack of standing." It's a big, cowardly action to avoid making a decision.
Get arrested and create standing...You'd think that from the 2008 Heller case, just one of the 100 million gun owning chest pounders, would have done that for the AW's or open/concealed carry without a license, but NOPE, not a single one.
@@MrDLRu Paging Mr. Irony... Mr. Irony, please pick up the white phone...
we can have full auto bb guns and airsoft. why the fk can't we have full auto centerfire rifles and smg's and pistols?
@@investigativeoutcomes9343 The "government" hates the very idea that "the people" could be able to do exactly what the 2A intended...have the ability to overthrow it!
nothing wrong with full auto ownership just don't go bankrupt
I think people should have to pay a ton of money to express certain views or say certain words that are scary. Someone tell me why it can't be done for the 1A when it's done for the 2A.
Here is the thing. Machine guns won’t be as expensive? Who wants an old pre 1986 m16 when you can legally get a new one?
Puff the magic dragon likes to eat gold bars to go on a date.
@darronlewark6504 Yes the enemy within. The people who own a 40,000 dollar machine gun. Don't want to see them now worth 800.00 So they hope machine guns are never on ever gun shops shelf. For anyone to purchase.
The supply is capped and there's unlimited demand. That's the only reason they are expensive you could get those guns for a few hundred when they came out.
Thanks William Kirk
This isn't the NFA though. It is just the Hughes amendment. I'm betting we will see this ultimately prevail with a ruling that says "NFA fine, new machine gun ban not."
I'd take that as an intermediate step as long as people didn't stop pushing for what's right.
This is both the most realistic and most reasonable outcome tbh.
still cant buy ar 15s or standard capacity mags in this state so the ruling doesnt really mean much to me at this point in time
How about a full auto with 1 round magazines? 😅
We can't buy an AR or a pistol with a threaded barrel either and you have to wait 10 days to get a 22 LR single shot Chipmunk for your kid to learn on.
what state are you talking about? if its California and you like guns I would consider moving away.
I live in the Democratic Peoples Republic of Washington also. Head over to the Free State of Idaho for
parts and mags.
@@TheXpompier if all the conservatives leave the blue how long until they start infecting the red states? stay and fight buy in another state
I hate how the Judicial system works more on where a lawsuit is filed instead of merits.
jewdicial system*
It means we wait and watch. It's going to be appealed, and then there's always that bit about the ATF ignoring pesky laws and judicial rulings they don't agree with.
It would take SCOTUS chiming in, Trump as President, and the ATF completely abolished before I'd think of rushing out to buy one.
What makes a machine gun "dangerous and unusual"? Most would say its capable fast rate of fire. However the Cargill decision highlighted the fact that ROF has zero bearing on what a machine gun is. So if ROF can't been weighed on the "Dangerous and Unusual" scale of what is a machine gun, then how else are machine guns able to be regulated. This will be an interesting case to follow for sure!
Until the Shall not be infringed clause has been changed through the Constitutionally required processes into a Shall not be infringed, except for...clause. None of the firearm regulations have any Constitutionally valid authorizations. Congress had zero authority to enact any of them.
I agree no gun platform should be illegal for the common individual. However don't leave out the "well regulated milita" part and that would be for the government to make laws that keep a well regulated milita. That does mean reasonable laws such as violent fellons not being legally allowed to posses a gun or to require reasonable training to posses guns like taking hunter safty or concealed carry course to be well trained and regulated.
@@mgallus
Well regulated in the terminology of the time was much more like a well regulated double barrel shotgun, meaning that both barrels worked together towards the same point of aim. It had absolutely nothing to do with government interventions.
@Vibe77Guy the purpose of the government is to govern the founding father knew that and understood that... you don't and yes keeping gun from people who are unable to reasonably handle guns is keeping a well regulated milita. It has noting to do with personal regulation but the government setting proper laws in order to keep a well regulated milita. I will state laws that ban any gun platform are unconstitutional but laws that keep a malita well regulated are not unconstitutional unless they go too far like red flag laws.
@@mgallus yah, thats not what, "well regulated" means.
Back then every fighting age male had to have a certain amount of power and lead for their muskets by law. They made sure that the citizens had what they needed to fight off another attack and that the govt knew they could count on them to take action against the enemy.
Thats what well regulated means...
@@mgallus😂 u dont know what ur talking about or your purposely deceiving people
The only thing it means to me is I've wasted a bunch of time watching youtube videos of people salivating and pretending the end of the NFA is just around the corner. Thanks for bringing some sanity back into it.
Thank you for always having timely and realistic analysis for us on these issues. It's invaluable to be able to watch a few minute video and receive an expert explanation on how our rights are being jeopardized and what we can do about it.
So you’re telling me I shouldn’t start budgeting for a 240b?
If they are legal to own the price should go way down. They don’t cost any more to make than semi autos
@@consco3667 well the semi version costs like 10 large so....
@@brandon45-70 😎😎😎😂I get it! But they make more autos than semis in the 240 B so we can hope
That would be "the 240G" at my last reckoning. Most of the 1917's and 1919's are still in service in "third world" wars today.
On August 23rd, the California Department of Justice (DOJ) released a notice of proposed rulemaking to increase the cost of the Ammunition Eligibility Check to $5.00 per authorization, a 500% increase over the existing fee of $1.00. This proposed increase comes on the heels of the legislature passing Assembly Bill 135 and Senate Bill 135 last year to allow the Attorney General to unilaterally increase the fee to conduct these checks, thereby potentially allowing costs to skyrocket over time due to bureaucratic inefficiency. Public comments will be accepted on the proposed rule until October 8th at 5:00pm
Brilliant video.
Lots of channels trumpet the ruling, but you have the clarity to break down the reality. Rulings dont happen in a vacuum, and by explaining the circumstances around the ruling, it helps us (non-lawyers) understand it more deeply, as well as how it most likely will (or will not) impact the average citizen. Like you said, there is always interplay between politics and the legal system. Well done on explaining this ruling. Thank you! Its why I keep hitting "play" when I see you posted a new video, even if other channels have covered the topic!
We need more channels like this that actually know how to interpret the legal language and truthfully convey what is actually happening and likely to happen. It gets old seeing the same click bait garbage… .
Keep up the good work and keeping us informed.
H.R. 11654 specifically states that if the United States Military has it, the Government has to make it available to all law abiding citizens for a reasonable price. this includes all weapons, vehicles, and other equipment.
thanks for the update!
One thing it means is, that in some places in Kansas, having a Federal Public Defender is an awesome attorney to have when being charged with possession of a machine gun. I wish I could remember his/her name to give them the props they deserve.
Clearly, satan is a lawyer.
Trump found that out.
Funny you say that, because Satan literally means slanderer or accuser.
Thanks for explaining this, William!
Thank you for another great video brother!
Great suit and tie Bill! Thanks for what you do.
Nicely done!
Very good information as you always give us . Thank you sir - We wait for more from you .
Man, I live in Kansas! I pray that they uphold Kansas’ decision.
Love your channel
Someone in my area and I called the police about and the police are cool about it, has a 50 caliber machine gun that he only shoots on New Years. The police told me this 50 caliber machine gun is mounted on a permanent concrete pad and no danger to the public. A beautiful sound to listen to on New Years.
I’m currently fighting a 922(o) charge. I’m about to enter the same route he took. Wishing for the best in court. They tried offering me 24 months.
That’s exactly what will happen. Tenth Circuit will reverse lower court and SCOTUS will refuse certiorari. End of story.
Only good for the one defendant, does not set a precedent. Nice, but not moving the needle any on NFA.
Excellent analysis
This Washington State. They don't want us to legally own a damn slingshot..
If a machine gun is not an arm, then what is it? A pussycat? A teddybear? A lollypop?
my penus? 🤣
Love the channel!
Greetings from the Peoples Republic of Illinois. Amazing how totalitarian states can remove inalienable rights from their subjects and it takes years of court fights to get a chance of getting them back while at the same time free states restore inalienable rights and yet again it takes years of court fighting to get them back. Is it just me or is there a trend here?
Our "government" hates us.
Definitely need to get some more information, ill have to send for the case in question 😮
LetZgo thank you for the content
I own seven transferable Machineguns I bought in the early 90’s when they were still affordable. I would love to be able to form 1 a Machinegun again. But I won’t count on it.
The USA gave away 75,Billion in this equipment 475,thousand m-16 machine guns wtf ?????
that's what gets me. They talk about keeping these "weapons of war" out of our hands....but then they leave ACTUAL weapons of war to be taken be ACTUAL bad people who will then distribute them to every bad person they know.
Disgusting
Fully automatic weapons are more or less range toys. Most are cheaply made and only valuable because of the limited supply.
What does it mean for the court system in the USA? Answer: Hot potato!!!! How to play 'Hot Potato: Standing in the circle, pass the beanbag or ball around the circle, while music plays in the background. If anyone drops the ball, they can pick it up and keep playing. When the music stops, the person holding the 'hot potato' is out. Keep going until there's only one person left, who can be declared the winner!
Good breakdown
So you're telling me there's a chance??!!!
Don’t kill my vibe by saying I can’t have a machine gun let me dream 🛌
M249 Saw .
I could never machine my own autosear. Completely impossible.
i can't afford it anyways. I'd go broke fast
well you can have one.
@@jamesmadison9244 yeah that would totally take a nuclear engineer.
What will this mean for Matt Hoover from CRS Firearms?
Great video!
When is the GCA68 going to be repealed? It too is unconstitutional.
Hey William, why wouldn’t the Supreme Court take petition for the case?
I agree with your assessment, but there is problem. In overturning the long-standing Roe v. Wade, the reasoning was "The Constitution makes no express reference to a right to obtain an abortion…," the June 24 ruling said. "We thus return the power to weigh those arguments to the people and their elected representatives." Now we come to the 2nd Amendment about which the Constitution has something to say, indeed a powerful command "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” so if we applied the same logic from the Roe decision it would seem that the only authority the federal government has is in protecting the right and at all levels of government. Good vid.
I just checked this case for updates. The appeal was just filed this past Friday, September 20th, 2024 for those reading in the future. The defense will get a certain amount of time to respond, likely 30-90 days. That will put it near or past the election, and only after the defense responds will a date for the appeal be put on the calendar. By that point, it should be after January 20th. Assuming Trump as back in office, what happens if his DOJ simply drops the appeal, and lets Judge Broomes' decision stand?
Thank you SO MUCH my dear fellow, for ADMITTING that the Rule of Law does NOT actually exist at the Appellate Level!
Your profession is bankrupt sir, and you've just proven that as fact!
Thank you for your hard work.
Cheers from the Oil Patch in Central WY
Ya I new this like I hope everyone else but sure is fun to see and who knows could start something
Who could actually afford range days with a fun switch?
Elect Trump and watch the price of ammo come right back down. As he un handicaps the manufacturers and lifts the ban on imports and stops the alphabet agencies from stockpiling everything available to create shortages. This is all government created pricing and can be undone just as quickly if DJT would get a pro-2A advisor. (Not likely but who knows)
To your point.. I'd be happy with even a burst mode. Is it wrong???🤷🏻♂️
@@pcalna3202 nope! I’m voting Trump in November. May all your range days be in full fun mode!
Not the point but there are many who actually could afford it.
Me! But then I would only be practicing maybe once a year. LOL
Machine guns can be 22LR or 9mm. A 22 would be far cheaper to blast per minute.
Thanks for the very well-communicated description of the practical realities of this finding. And in terms of practical reality I would personally be FINE with machine guns staying on the NFA -- IF we could get rid of the Hughes amendment, so that we could have modern, newly-built machine guns....at reasonable prices as well.
Your show showed up on Tuesday
thats your takeaway huh
" Well, don't hold your breath " made me give a sarcastic laugh.
It means? No limit on rounds in a clip or other device. FREEDOM .
I’ve been budgeting for an MG way before this ruling
Can I ask why .. no one pick up . The CRS case ?????
He clearly broke the law selling machine guns, or that was is implied intent. Not a good case for us.
I am sure there would be a hot trot in Olympia to specifically ban full auto if the lower court ruling is upheld (if full auto is not already banned specifically in state), but in the interim could you imagine the absurdity of owning a full auto but not being allowed to own a bump stock? 🤔
So then... we shouldn't all be submitting eForm 1s for MGs this week and citing this case, and then collectively using the denials as grounds for a lawsuit? Booooo.
Your office is better lit than your mom's basement
Funny that I get an ad for Kamala on a video about machine guns. I think the algorithm is having a stroke.
Everyone needs to be Super Safe, hahahaha
If we want to take down the NFA, we need to first reverse the holding in _Miller._ After that, we need to target the horrible overbroad precedent set in _Wickard v. Filburn_ (1942), which will enable us to tackle remaining firearms laws that hinge on the Interstate Commerce Clause.
Marberry vs. Madison 1803
There exists NO LICENSE to practice law in this country! A bar card isn't a license issued by a monoly.
If a bar card is a license.... show me how and by what authority!
A lot of legal weight is given to the aba.... but back the bus up and look where and how it started. It wasn't by and through congress.
In Supreme Court Docket Case # 22-1124, which states that machinegun and silencer kits are machineguns and silencers per statute and case law, why then, does the Supreme Court and the DOJ allow the machineguns and the silencers to continue to be sold illegally to the public?
Are we not a country of laws?
Shall not be infringed, government never had the power to tell me what arms I can carry to begin with.
What does it mean for me? I’m shopping!
Great video
I’m no lawyer, but I said the same thing. I’ll go one further, and predict that some democrat will use this ruling (and the enthusiasm surrounding the case) as a sounding board to seek roll backs of recent Supreme Court rulings, or to justify packing the court.
These people are not stupid, and again, I am no lawyer, but if I thought of it, you can can bet that some anti-2A fanatic either already has, or soon will think about it as well.
The biggest losers to an actual repeal of machine gun ban would be people who currently own transferable machine guns. Especially no name brand AR lowers that were pinned for an auto sear 40 years ago.
Those things would lose 99% of their value overnight.
The people who bought them for their value, or bought them and then valued their market price over their right to the tools themselves, never valued our rights to begin with. We don’t care about them.
Fuck em. That's all I gotta say.
@@plzhelpj2316 exactly.
Fk em, that's all I gotta say.
@@plzhelpj2316 exactly.
Tuesday, good guess
It will mean something to me when my LGS finally can stock a giggle switch for my AR.
Yep, the heuristic approach, namely that the politicians and courts will never permit mere serfs to have automatic weapons, does count for far more than detailed legal analyses, which themselves are based on the mistaken belief that courts actually state the true reasons for why they decide as they do. Experience is a wonderful teacher.
When I went through the court record, this case was really strange, and a couple of things stand out that make this different from 99.99% of all machinegun cases I've reade about in the last 20 years.
1.) Tamori Morgan doesn't appear to have a record of any other arrest in Kansas.
2.) The two charges and indictement for possessing the weapons occured weeks before his arrest. That is way different than pulling over a drug dealer or doing a vehicle stop and discovering a machine gun. Again that is the majority of the machinegun cases. Neither is there a charge or allegation that Mr. Morgan was selling or trying to sell a maching gun, which is likely the rest of the cases.
It makes me wonder if this was information gained by someone facing charges who knew about Mr. Morgans guns and turned over evidence to the ATF/FBI.
3.) I read the DOJ Brief, its weak.
4.) The court went out of its way to only apply the analysis to Mr. Morgan's case.
Why would the DOJ appeal the case and not just take the L for presenting a poor case?
I'm curious in the governments filings why there isn't more info on the weapon. They entered one photo showing just the selector settings and none of the internals. How do we know that it is fall auto? Did the manufacturer actually make those, how did it get to Mr. Morgan? ( www.courtlistener.com/docket/67222373/33/1/united-states-v-morgan/)
Last thougth. The DOJ could appeal, win, then drop the charges. (Likely with the weapons being disposed of between the win and the drop.)
Owning a fully automatic firearm has ALWAYS been my/our Right.
Now, being able to AFFORD to feed the thing(s)?
;-)
WHAT! I can't make my blicky more quicky!!!
The government can stall a one sided case almost indefinitely... so a case like this will never matter.
William Kirk getting dragged through the mud right now on Law of Self Defense Channel
Free CRS!
WA needs to legalize them.
kind of glad I moved to Kansas 5 years ago.....still America out here
You can have any gun you want, just don’t tell anyone. NOBODY.
Miller vs US 1939 upheld that militia weapons are constitutional, only short barreled shotguns had no militia use. US Army does use short barrel shotguns today ie M26 MASS.
Thing was Trench Guns (short barrel shotguns) were already available in WW1.
Trench shotguns had 20” bbls
Cool!!! BAR or 60!?!? Wait, What??
I could see this one getting through, and then it will be used as justification to stack the Supreme Court.
Unfortunately, because it's firearms related, not much until this case reaches the Supreme Court.
It at least gives us a shot at getting rid of Hughes, if not the unconstitutional NFA. A small chance is better than none at all.
Reality is often disappointing.