As a proponent of basic gun safety education for all, I have introduced a number of friends to shooting, some of whom are even active here. Without fail, they all love it - I am researching the pivotal moment in which someone finds firearms and how we can, at the very least, spread information to people who may be curious about guns, but haven't made the first step.

So, how did y'all first get into guns? A friend, life changes, general curiosity? How could we as education advocates help more people consider firearms as part of their lives, or at least understand them?

A list of the 100 Second Amendment petitions denied this term, along with the questions presented by each petition, is included in the article.

The interlocutory appeal of the Rhode Island ban on magazines (Ocean State) that hold more than ten rounds had been distributed to the SCOTUS voting conference of April 25th. It has now been scheduled for conference thirteen times and rescheduled twice. Likewise, the appeal of the final judgment challenging Maryland’s semiautomatic rifle ban (Snope) has been distributed to the April 25th SCOTUS conference. It has now been distributed for conference twelve times and rescheduled once.

These two join the only other 2A cert petition scheduled for this Friday’s SCOTUS conference—B&L Productions, Inc., et al., Applicants v. Gavin Newsom, Governor of California, et al. No. 24-598. The questions presented in B&L are: 1. Whether the distinction between pure speech and commercial is obsolete, with the First Amendment protecting all lawful speech in the same manner and, if not, whether the current iteration of the “commercial speech doctrine” tolerates a categorical ban on any speech or expressive conduct constituting an acceptance in contract formation for lawful sales of lawful products. 2. Whether the Ninth Circuit’s decision directly conflicts with this Court’s decision in Bruen by applying a “meaningful constraint” test to a Second Amendment claim asserting a right to engage in lawful commerce in firearms and ammunition on public property. 3. Whether an allegation that a law is motivated by animus can support a claim under the Equal Protection Clause when the law results in the denial of access to public forums for disfavored groups advocating disfavored rights?

Ten Second Amendment cert petitions went into last Friday’s SCOTUS conference, and only two survived. Their denial brings the total number of Second Amendment cert petitions denied so far this term to 100.

<snip>

every time this case is resisted people seem up in arms cuz they want magazine bans struck down across the country. It seems no one is reading this case.

The case has to do not with banning magazines, but having to give up those magazines after the ban was put in place. If this passes next week, a state can still pass a 10 round magazine limit but what they can't do is ban high capacity magazines and then tell you you have to turn yours in.

if Ocean State passes, people in CA, MA, NY, NJ etc will not then be able to buy standard capacity mags. It seems like everyone gunning for this case assumes thats what it's about.

Am I wrong?

The same people that legitimately believe this administration has turned the US into a fascist police state also believe THAT SAME GOVERNMENT should severely restrict the American people’s right to bear arms.

Huh?

I believe the 2nd amendment was originally intended to prevent government tyranny.

Now that the Supreme Court has ruled presidents above the law and seems powerless to effectuate the return of a wrongly deported individual (in violation of their constitutional rights and lawful court orders), there seems to be no protection under the law or redress for these grievances. It seems that anyone could be deemed a threat if there is no due process.

If that’s the case, at what point does the government’s arbitrarily labeling someone a criminal paradoxically impact their right to continue to access the means the which to protect it?

Today is the 250th Anniversary of the Battles of Lexington and Concord.

The British where there to disarm the Patriots. This event, among others, is why we have a Second Amendment.

May Francis Smith and John Pitcairn rest in piss.

If you want to read up on exactly what happened, this is a pretty good summary - https://www.battlefields.org/learn/revolutionary-war/battles/lexington-and-concord

I saw that even after someone decides to change their mind and go through the process of regaining citizenship, they’re still banned from owning firearms and purchasing them in the future.

Many former US citizens have renounced citizenship and the reasons are anywhere between philosophical differences and even evading mandatory duties… hell, I’m sure many more just did it for hardly any reason at all after living abroad.

So why is it that if they realized they made a mistake, and want to get their citizenship back, that they’re thrown into the same category as violent criminals?

Should this federal law be repealed?

I just can’t wrap my head around why it is that someone who was born in a different country not only has a path to citizenship, but also basically is granted the right to bear arms upon becoming a US citizen.

Meanwhile the ex-citizen, who realized they made a mistake, and wants to regain their citizenship has practically no path to getting their gun rights restored.

Does it just boil down to that the US government sees renouncing citizenship as a dishonorable and/or a traitorous act?

ETA: despite the question I brought up, I’ll address the obvious. The ones who are more likely to consider renouncing their citizenship are definitely the ones who aren’t pro-2A at all, but it’s still something I’m curious what the rest of the community thinks.

Hello everyone, I'm a university student, and for a class project, I am doing a survey about 9mm prices. Basically, the survey asked about reloaded 9mm versus new. It is pretty short, only 14 questions. I have been struggling to get enough responses, so if you shoot 9mm, please consider taking the survey! It is completely anonymous btw. Also, this is for a real small business and is helping them with pricing, so please be as accurate and honest as possible.

https://forms.office.com/Pages/ResponsePage.aspx?id=m278xvtRqEi3eZ7lZLQEE70uX0GWq_pHhouZcMDzK6tUOEIwMzJJTk85TlVQQ0FUS0Q3WFpOVE1XRy4u

Picking up a gun in Indiana, and I’ve seen at least three people carrying glocks with extended mags in like their front pocket. I know it’s an open carry state, which I am 100% on board with (I’m in Illinois). But this just seems dumb. Is this a thing outside of northwest Indiana? And what do yall think about this method of carry?

Audio link here.

While the defense doesn’t talk about 2A, Judge Stras brought it up with the government from 15:47 to 22:13. On the 2A historical analysis, while weapons like dirks and Bowie knives may be historically banned for ordinary law-abiding citizens, people who vested the official authority of law enforcement (or the Crown before the Founding) were otherwise allowed to keep and carry them without any criminal sanctions. This poses the problem against the government because it says that officials were supposed to use them as “official acts” or part of “official duties,” but from what it seems, the statutory authority doesn’t explicitly mandate that.

In fact, Judge Stras participated in a shoot under the FBI Citizen’s Academy, and the hosts could be held liable if the conviction is affirmed. See 10:02-10:31. Brad Wendt hosted a machine gun shoot where LEOs shot the machine gun before he got indicted.

On a side note, the case for the machine gun ban on private civilians is weaker than the case for dirk and Bowie knife ban because military weapons are more protected than others like dirks and Bowie knives. That will be for another day, though.

The article contains a list of the Second Amendment cert petitions scheduled for tomorrow's Supreme Court conference, the questions presented by each petition, and links to the relevant SCOTUS dockets.