Categories
The 1863 Sharps cavalry carbine
A customer checks out a hand gun that is for sale and on display at SP firearms on June 23, 2022, in Hempstead, New York. A landmark Supreme Court decision on the Second Amendment is dismantling gun law across the country, dividing judges and sowing confusion over what firearm restrictions can remain on the books. Experts say the high court’s ruling that outlined a new test for evaluating gun laws left open many questions, resulting in an increasing number of conflicting decisions as lower court judges struggle to figure out how to apply it. (AP Photo/Brittainy Newman, File)
WASHINGTON (AP) — A landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision on the Second Amendment is upending gun laws across the country, dividing judges and sowing confusion over what firearm restrictions can remain on the books.
The high court’s ruling that set new standards for evaluating gun laws left open many questions, experts say, resulting in an increasing number of conflicting decisions as lower court judges struggle to figure out how to apply it.
The Supreme Court’s so-called Bruen decision changed the test that lower courts had long used for evaluating challenges to firearm restrictions. Judges should no longer consider whether the law serves public interests like enhancing public safety, the justices said.
Under the Supreme Court’s new test, the government that wants to uphold a gun restriction must look back into history to show it is consistent with the country’s “historical tradition of firearm regulation.”
Courts in recent months have declared unconstitutional federal laws designed to keep guns out of the hands of domestic abusers,felony defendants and people who use marijuana. Judges have shot down a federal ban on possessing guns with serial numbers removed and gun restrictions for young adults in Texas and have blocked the enforcement of Delaware’s ban on the possession of homemade “ghost guns.”
In several instances, judges looking at the same laws have come down on opposite sides on whether they are constitutional in the wake of the conservative Supreme Court majority’s ruling. The legal turmoil caused by the first major gun ruling in a decade will likely force the Supreme Court to step in again soon to provide more guidance for judges.
“There’s confusion and disarray in the lower courts because not only are they not reaching the same conclusions, they’re just applying different methods or applying Bruen’s method differently,” said Jacob Charles, a professor at Pepperdine University’s law school who focuses on firearms law.
“What it means is that not only are new laws being struck down … but also laws that have been on the books for over 60 years, 40 years in some cases, those are being struck down — where prior to Bruen — courts were unanimous that those were constitutional,” he said.
The legal wrangling is playing out as mass shootings continue to plague the country awash in guns and as law enforcement officials across the U.S. work to combat an uptick in violent crime.
This week, six people were fatally shot at multiple locations in a small town in rural Mississippi and a gunman killed three students and critically wounded five others at Michigan State University before killing himself.
Dozens of people have died in mass shootings so far in 2023, including in California, where 11 people were killed as they welcomed the Lunar New Year at a dance hall popular with older Asian Americans. Last year, more than 600 mass shootings occurred in the U.S. in which at least four people were killed or wounded, according to the Gun Violence Archive.
The decision opened the door to a wave of legal challenges from gun-rights activists who saw an opportunity to undo laws on everything from age limits to AR-15-style semi-automatic weapons. For gun rights supporters, the Bruen decision was a welcome development that removed what they see as unconstitutional restraints on Second Amendment rights.
“It’s a true reading of what the Constitution and the Bill of Rights tells us,” said Mark Oliva, a spokesman for the National Shooting Sports Foundation. “It absolutely does provide clarity to the lower courts on how the constitution should be applied when it comes to our fundamental rights.”
Gun control groups are raising alarm after a federal appeals court this month said that under the Supreme Court’s new standards, the government can’t stop people who have domestic violence restraining orders against them from owning guns.
The New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals acknowledged that the law “embodies salutary policy goals meant to protect vulnerable people in our society.” But the judges concluded that the government failed to point to a precursor from early American history that is comparable enough to the modern law. Attorney General Merrick Garland has said the government will seek further review of that decision.
Gun control activists have decried the Supreme Court’s historical test, but say they remain confident that many gun restrictions will survive challenges. Since the decision, for example, judges have consistently upheld the federal ban on convicted felons from possessing guns.
The Supreme Court noted that cases dealing with “unprecedented societal concerns or dramatic technological changes may require a more nuanced approach.” And the justices clearly emphasized that the right to bear arms is limited to law-abiding citizens, said Shira Feldman, litigation counsel for Brady, the gun control group.
The Supreme Court’s test has raised questions about whether judges are suited to be poring over history and whether it makes sense to judge modern laws based on regulations — or a lack thereof— from the past.
“We are not experts in what white, wealthy, and male property owners thought about firearms regulation in 1791. Yet we are now expected to play historian in the name of constitutional adjudication,” wrote Mississippi U.S. District Judge Carlton Reeves, who was appointed by President Barack Obama.
Some judges are “really parsing the history very closely and saying ‘these laws aren’t analogous because the historical law worked in a slightly different fashion than the modern law’,” said Andrew Willinger, executive director of the Duke Center for Firearms Law.
Others, he said, “have done a much more flexible inquiry and are trying to say ‘look, what is the purpose of this historical law as best I can understand it?’”
Firearm rights and gun control groups are closely watching many pending cases, including several challenging state laws banning certain semi-automatic weapons and high-capacity magazines.
A federal judge in Chicago on Friday denied a bid to block an Illinois law that bans the sale of so-called assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, finding the law to be constitutional under the Supreme Court’s new test. A state court, however, already has partially blocked the law — allowing some gun dealers to continue selling the weapons — amid a separate legal challenge.
Already, some gun laws passed in the wake of the Supreme Court decision have been shot down. A judge declared multiple portions of New York’s new gun law unconstitutional, including rules that restrict carrying firearms in public parks and places of worship. An appeals court later put that ruling on hold while it considers the case. And the Supreme Court has allowed New York to enforce the law for now.
Some judges have upheld a law banning people under indictment for felonies from buying guns while others have declared it unconstitutional.
A federal judge issued an order barring Delaware from enforcing provisions of a new law outlawing the manufacture and possession of so-called “ghost guns” that don’t have serial numbers and can be nearly impossible for law enforcement officials to trace. But another judge rejected a challenge to California’s “ghost gun” regulations.
In the California case, U.S. District Judge George Wu, who was nominated by President George W. Bush, appeared to take a dig at how other judges are interpreting the Supreme Court’s guidance.
The company that brought the challenge —“and apparently certain other courts” — would like to treat the Supreme Court’s decision “as a ‘word salad,’ choosing an ingredient from one side of the ‘plate’ and an entirely-separate ingredient from the other, until there is nothing left whatsoever other than an entirely-bulletproof and unrestrained Second Amendment,” Wu wrote in his ruling.
____
Richer reported from Boston.
———————————————————————————– Nobody likes a sore loser! Oh well!!!!!!!!!!!! Grumpy
Categories
All of them can REALLY mess up your Day
Their all 9mm by the way. Grumpy
Categories
I am green with envy!
Discover Financial Services, a provider of credit cards, told Reuters it will allow its network to track purchases at gun retailers come April, making it the first among its peers to move ahead with the initiative aimed at helping authorities probe gun-related crimes.
The decision came after the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), which decides on the classification of merchant categories used by payment cards, approved in September the launch of a dedicated code for gun retailers.
Proponents of the move, including gun control activists and Democratic politicians, say it will allow financial institutions to better assist authorities in investigating crimes involving gun violence in the United States.
There has been uncertainty around the implementation, with Visa Inc, Mastercard Inc and American Express Co yet to disclose a timetable for adopting the change. Although the codes will not show specific items purchased, some Republican politicians have spoken out against the move, arguing it could violate the privacy of U.S. citizens lawfully buying guns.
Isn’t that nice? The ISO wants to know what you’re purchasing with your wealth. The ISO, an international organization – although I’m sure that U.S. banks were all too willing to comply and the ISO is just a straw man.
If you have a Discover Card, be aware that this change is coming and make appropriate arrangements.
At least Louisiana is fighting back in what I guess is the only way they can. Texas, I think, has similar laws now.
Grandparents weren’t born old and wise. In their prime,
they were likely markedly cooler than we are.
“Hi, this seat taken?” the man asked.
He was unnaturally handsome. His piercing blue eyes nearly took her breath away.
“Saving it for you,” the young lady responded coyly.
She absentmindedly straightened her airline-issue blue polyester skirt. The woman was objectively gorgeous in her own right.
“I’ll have what the lady’s having,” the man gestured to the bartender. “And get her another while you’re at it, brother. Thanks.”
In moments the barkeep returned with two glasses of ice water.
“The name’s Ricky,” the big man said, extending his hand. “You a pilot?”
She smiled. “I’m Nancy Frierson and don’t be silly. I’ve been a stewardess with Pan Am since ’47.” She studied him with an experienced eye. He was fit and hard, and he had the look.
“Europe or the Pacific?” she asked.
The man diverted his gaze to his glass, though the electric smile never left his face. “Europe,” he said.
“Yeah, me, too,” Nancy responded. “I was a nurse in France for 7 months. Afterward, I lost my enthusiasm for nursing, but I enjoyed the travel, so here we are. What did you do?”
“OSS. Know anything about that?” he asked flatly.
“Not really,” she answered. He obviously didn’t much want to talk about it. “How about now? What brings you to the airport in DC?”
“I still work for the government, though I’m based out of Chicago nowadays. I have a meeting this evening then I’m likely heading back tomorrow. You?” he asked.
“I’m deadheading to London in the morning. Pan Am puts us crew up in the Omni Shoreham when we’re stuck here overnight. I’m based out of Atlanta. We cycle through Paris, Stockholm, and Oslo before rotating back to London and heading home to the States. Repeat as necessary every other week. It’s a good job. I get to meet some interesting people.”
There was that smile again. She loved the way it made her feel.
Ricky and Nancy chatted for another half an hour, burning through the standard fodder about family, hobbies, and favorite places to eat on the continent. It was clear that he was as well-traveled as she was. Ricky suddenly glanced at his watch and frowned.
“I am truly sorry,” he said with sincere regret. “But I’m going to miss my meeting if I’m not careful. It has been a genuine pleasure meeting you, Nancy Frierson from Atlanta.” He dismounted the bar stool and hefted his canvas bag. The man took the woman’s hand and then leaned forward to kiss her softly on the forehead. She squeezed his hand back. As he walked away, she wondered what sort of man had a meeting at 7:30 on a Sunday night in Washington, D.C.
The unexpected knock startled her. Nancy set her mystery book aside and made her way to the door to her hotel room, checking that the chain was fastened and that her sweatshirt was presentable. She cracked the door and was shocked to see Ricky standing alone in the hallway.
“May I come in?” he asked.
Her first inclination was to say he most certainly could not, but there was something about his face. Though she struggled to place it, she had seen that look somewhere before. Against her better judgment, she closed the door, unfastened the chain, and opened it again. Ricky pressed inside without fanfare. She subconsciously checked the hallway. No one else was around.
The M-3A1 Grease Gun was designed with the espionage mission in mind.
As she turned around, the man dropped his heavy bag onto the bed and removed his long coat. She then noticed the sticky black wetness on his left upper arm. There was a small corresponding tear to the man’s pea coat that she had not seen previously. The bag was open this time, and the pistol grip of an M-3 Grease Gun protruded through the slash. The man retrieved a GI-issue battle dressing from the bag before sitting heavily on the room’s small sofa.
“I am truly sorry to barge in on you like this,” the man said, fatigue now heavy in his voice. “I really do work for the government, but what I do is best kept removed from the local police.”
He dropped his flannel shirt to expose a deep ugly gouge across his left deltoid. Nancy had seen enough gunshot wounds in France to recognize this one. Without really thinking, she soaked a towel in warm water and used it to clean the wound before dressing it properly. Ricky was pleased to see that she really did know what she was doing.
Rock and Nans were the best grandparents a guy could ever hope to have. They were married for 57 years. As far as we knew, Rock’s entire adult life was spent working for the railroad. We grandchildren loved going to work with him and climbing on the trains.
Everybody wonders how their grandparents first met. Rock didn’t admit the truth to me until three weeks before he died. That last operational mission had been to interdict a meet between a turncoat American nuclear scientist and a Russian agent in rural Virginia. Grandpa Rock said he personally set the Russian H-bomb back 5 years. However, after that evening in Nan’s room, he knew it was time to settle down. An assassin’s life was no way to raise a family.
Who doesn’t love shooting historic firearms? I love my modern guns as much as the next guy, but I’ve always been a sucker for old blasters, especially military types. The first gun I bought as an adult was a 1908 Brazilian Mauser that I still pull out and shoot once in a while. In the video linked below, Luke Tomes and Louee Dessent from the History Hit YouTube Channel visit the Royal Armory in Leeds, UK to fire a 16th century arquebus, an 18th century “Brown Bess” flintlock musket, and a World War I era Lee Enfield SMLE rifle.
British firearms historian Jonathan Ferguson guides and instructs Luke and Louee, neither of whom have ever handled a real firearm. Luke, Louee, and Jonathan visit the Royal Armory’s indoor range, where they learn about and fire three firearms that span 500 years of British history.
The Arquebus
The term “arquebus” comes from the Dutch hakebusse, meaning “hook gun” or “hook tube.” This may come from the butt stock’s bent shape, or some muzzles may have had a metal hook to brace the firearm. It might be both.
Each arquebus was handmade by individual gunsmiths so there was no standard model. There wasn’t even a standard projectile caliber, meaning each soldier, or “arquebusier,” had to tailor his ammunition to his gun. But the projectiles were invariably large caliber, as we see in the video.
The term “arquebus” was applied to several different firearms but, in this case, the gun is a smoothbore, matchlock muzzleloading long gun. The “match” is a slow-burning fuse called a “slow match.” Each arquebusier kept a length of burning fuse during combat. After loading, the arquebusier attached the match to the “serpentine,” which we would think of as a kind of hammer. When he was ready to fire, the arquebusier pulled the trigger, which moved the serpentine forward, bringing the match into contact with the pan. The pan is filled with black powder during the loading process.
Ideally, the arquebus then fires, though it is noticeably delayed from the trigger pull. The gun’s firing is preceded by a flash as the powder ignites. Sometimes the powder flashes without firing the weapon, leading to the expression “flash in the pan,” denoting a sudden event that amounts to nothing.
Firing the Arquebus
Luke and Louee fire a reproduction arquebus, based on a model from the 1530s. Firing a real 16th-century weapon could be dangerous, as well as possibly damaging an irreplaceable historical artifact. Jonathan loads for them since the process is understandably awkward. With Luke and Louee being new shooters, I was glad to see Jonathan emphasizing proper firearms safety as he worked with Luke and Louee.
Luke goes first. His first attempt is a misfire, meaning he has to hold the heavy arquebus up while Jonathan repositions the match. His shot is remarkably accurate, considering his support arm was getting tired. The flash before the shot would take some getting used to since it’s right in the shooter’s face.
Louee repeats the process, but his shot isn’t as accurate as Luke’s despite getting a good ignition on the first try. Both shooters remark on the weapon’s low recoil. Jonathan agrees that it is a soft shooter, with much of its weight forward.
The Brown Bess Musket
“Brown Bess” refers to a series of standard-issue smoothbore flintlock muskets used by the British Army in the 18th and 19th centuries. This example is a Model 1793 India Pattern Type I Musket, which was used in the Napoleonic Wars.
Jonathan explains the name “Brown Bess” to Luke and Louee. “Brown” meant “ordinary,” presumably because it was issued to “ordinary” soldiers, as opposed to the rifles issued to more elite troops. “Bess” was a common girl’s name. Jonathan says the concept of the soldier’s firearm being his new wife was common even then and he references the famous scene from Full Metal Jacket. Some things never change.
Unlike the arquebus, the guys shoot a real Brown Bess, one of 3 million Model 1793 India Pattern Muskets made by the British. So that gun may have been fired in anger over 200 years ago.
The obvious improvements are the flintlock mechanism and paper cartridge, along with the standardized manufacture and ammunition. The British Army’s standard firing rate was three aimed shots per minute.
Firing the Brown Bess Musket
Louee goes first with the Brown Bess, with Jonathan talking him through the still intricate loading process. They both learn how to tear the paper cartridge with their teeth, along with avoiding getting a mouthful of gunpowder. Jonathan notes that the musket’s projectile is larger than the arquebus round, requiring more powder to propel.
The paper cartridge is also more efficient. Where much of the matchlock gun’s energy was dissipated in the pan, the musket’s entire powder charge is contained in the barrel, producing much more energy and velocity. The felt recoil is therefore much higher.
Both shooters take their turn with Louee proving to be the better musketeer. Both remarked on the musket’s greater recoil. There’s still a noticeable flash as the flint strikes the steel, igniting the powder. There is also a slight delay before the weapon fires, though not as long as the arquebus.
The Lee Enfield SMLE
The Short Magazine Lee Enfield is one of the classic bolt action battle rifles. The Lee Enfield series was introduced in 1895 and, after a few modifications, served as the primary British service rifle of the First World War. Later updates kept the Enfield in service into the mid-1950s, including widespread use in World War II.
Jonathan’s choice for Luke and Louee’s range trip appears to be the iconic MK III or MK III* of World War I vintage. Chambered in .303 British, the MK III series is famous for the “Mad Minute,” a marksmanship exercise in which British soldiers fired from the prone for one minute. They began with five rounds loaded, with stripper clip reloads coming from a bandolier. They fired at a 48-inch target at 300 yards. The standard was 15 hits, not shots, in one minute. The Mad Minute record was 38 hits, fired by Sergeant Alfred Snoxall (or Frank Snoxell, accounts differ) of the Loyal North Lancashire Regiment in 1914. Snoxall was a marksmanship instructor at the time.
The Mad Minute’s battlefield debut was the 1914 Battle of Mons. British rifle fire was so intense that the attacking German soldiers reportedly thought they were facing machine guns. World War I hadn’t devolved into trench warfare yet, so the Germans withdrew instead of attacking machine guns over open ground.
Firing the Lee Enfield SMLE
Luke goes first, loading the rifle with a five-round stripper clip. Both shooters fire five-round groups. Jonathan explains the great leap from muzzleloaders and even single-shot breechloading rifles to the internal magazine rifles, which exponentially increased the individual rifleman’s firepower.
Luke was clearly unfamiliar with the SMLE’s mechanism, but Jonathan got him through, and he fired what looked to be about a six-inch group at short range. Louee was also clearly a beginner, requiring some instruction, but he then ripped off a very nice two-inch four round group with one flyer. Both shooters seemed to like the SMLE better than the arquebus or the Brown Bess.
Shooting History
Luke and Louee clearly enjoyed their experience. Their shooting stances were less than ideal, and they were uncertain at times, but we’ve all been there at some point. Jonathan notes that, for first-time shooters, they did remarkably well.
Louee talks about how cool it was to shoot those three firearms, spanning some 400 years of development, one after the other. It does seem like a novel experience. Luke comments that the technological advancements make it easier to understand the increasing death tolls of wars throughout history, culminating in “the devastation of the First World War.” It’s true that technology drives tactics and vice versa. World War I was no exception.
Luke and Louee have produced a very interesting video here. Do yourself a favor and check it out. Jonathan shares much more knowledge than we have room for here. We expect many of you have fired a Lee Enfield rifle at some time or another. How about a Brown Bess or even an arquebus? Let us know in the comments.