Will The Supreme Court Take Up This State's Assault Weapon & Magazine Bans?

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 27 апр 2024
  • Sportsman's Guide: www.sportsmansguide.com/?pmdg...
    SAVE $20 Off Your 1st $100 Spent w/Code: GADGETS
    Use Code: GUNGAG5 through May 31st to save 5% on Hornady freedom seeds!!!
    Join my email list: leviathangroup.ac-page.com/gu...
    Support GNG via Patreon: / gunsandgadgets
    Blackout Coffee: www.blackoutcoffee.com/gng
    GNG Shirts: www.tristartrading.com/jaredjj
    Gun Owners of America: gunowners.org/gunsgadgets/
    Join Firearms Policy Coalition: bit.ly/gunsandgadgets
    Second Amendment Foundation: bit.ly/SAFGunsAndGadgets
    Backup Channel: / 2ndamendmentnews
    GunsandGadgets@charter.net
    Guns & Gadgets Media
    3101 Browns Mill Rd Ste 6
    Johnson City, Tennessee 37604
    ---------------
    WHAT I USE TO MAKE VIDEOS
    ---------------
    MAIN CAMERA: amzn.to/2QfvKBP
    VLOG LENS: amzn.to/2QtviAd
    ZOOM LENS: amzn.to/2QdsSp9
    VLOG CAMERA: amzn.to/35dnOtt
    LIGHTING: amzn.to/3l4Mp9z
    SOFTBOX: amzn.to/3JZ2Lyl
    MICROPHONE: amzn.to/34lJEdW
    2ND MIC: amzn.to/3DapZ0G
    TRIPOD: amzn.to/44tTO8v
    MEMORY: amzn.to/31ht4Ka
    DRONE: amzn.to/3hlX5hI
    DISCLAIMER: The materials available through Guns & Gadgets Media (including any show, episode, guest appearance, etc. appearing within) are for informational and entertainment purposes only.
    The opinions expressed through this video are the opinions of the individual author and are for educational and documentary purposes only.
    FAIR USE: In the rare instance I include someone else’s footage it is covered in Fair Use for Documentary and Educational purposes with the intention of driving commentary and allowing freedom of speech.
    IMPORTANT: All shooting is done on state-approved firing ranges by trained professionals. Our videos are produced in a safe environment by highly trained professionals with decades of experience. These videos are strictly for educational and entertainment purposes only. Imitation or the use of anything demonstrated in my videos is done AT YOUR OWN RISK. Do not attempt to replicate the actions featured in our videos without the proper training, licensing, and medical professionals present.
    We are not attempting to sell you the items featured in this video. We are not instructing our viewers on how to modify firearms, accessories, or otherwise change their basic legal function. All firearms and accessories are legal products commonly available in stores all across the United States. Our videos are for entertainment purposes only. We are not a gun shop and DO NOT sell or deal in Firearms. Such a practice is heavily regulated and subject to applicable laws. I DO NOT sell parts, magazines, or firearms.
    © 2024 Guns & Gadgets Media
    #2a #2ndamendment #breakingnews #breaking

Комментарии • 548

  • @GunsGadgets
    @GunsGadgets  Месяц назад +18

    Sportsman's Guide: www.sportsmansguide.com/?pmdgtl=1&webpagedate-
    SAVE $20 Off Your 1st $100 Spent w/Code: GADGETS
    Use Code: GUNGAG5 through May 31st to save 5% on Hornady freedom seeds!!!
    Join my email list: leviathangroup.ac-page.com/guns-and-gadgets-sign-up-page
    GNG Website & Affiliate Links: www.gunsngadgets.com
    Support GNG via Patreon: www.patreon.com/GUNSandGADGETS
    Blackout Coffee: www.blackoutcoffee.com/gng
    GNG Shirts: www.tristartrading.com/jaredjj
    Gun Owners of America: gunowners.org/gunsgadgets/
    Join Firearms Policy Coalition: bit.ly/gunsandgadgets
    Second Amendment Foundation: bit.ly/SAFGunsAndGadgets
    GNG Email List: linktr.ee/gunsandgadgets

    • @TheGunsAndGloryShow
      @TheGunsAndGloryShow Месяц назад

      Hi Jared. The Guns N Glory Show was deleted. I got tired of the fascism.

    • @colt-ss3lw
      @colt-ss3lw Месяц назад

      200,000 in New Jersey. Not to nit-pick but!

  • @rogercoffey3794
    @rogercoffey3794 Месяц назад +174

    All gun laws are infringements.

    • @JSmith-ou3sk
      @JSmith-ou3sk Месяц назад +8

      They are also CRIMINAL.

    • @smashthehammer5348
      @smashthehammer5348 Месяц назад +6

      And dual taxes on guns. Commiefornia

    • @p.s.vanderpool6770
      @p.s.vanderpool6770 Месяц назад

      Our government cannot effectively Rule of us if we have a means of resistance. Get educated in science stuff and minore manufacturing. They can't take that away!

    • @flippinnickelproductions298
      @flippinnickelproductions298 Месяц назад +2

      Exactly

    • @joer.6458
      @joer.6458 Месяц назад +4

      Remember, our Founders said we have the UNALIENABLE Right to remove and replace "any form of government" in the 2nd Paragraph of the Declaration [And they repeated this Right two sentences later and included that there is a "duty" to exercise this Right. This Right is prescribed-as-protected under the 9th Amendment.
      Again, our Founders used the term "U N A L I E N A B L E". Therefore, our Founders, who wrote our Declaration and Constitution DID NOT BELIEVE SUCH RIGHT AND DUTY COULD BE TAKEN AWAY. Therefore OUR FOUNDERS DID NOT, by any provision within the Declaration, OR ANY OTHER SUBSEQUENT DOCUMENT, abolish or circumvent this Right. Further, our Founders did not assign the authority to do so to anyone else IN ANY SUBSEQUENT DOCUMENT.
      Therefore, We cannot have that Right and duty, yet still have to ask, the government we deem is in need of replacing, for the means, OR THE PERMISSION TO OBTAIN THE MEANS, to do so.
      See 10th Cir. case No. 2023-5099.

  • @markmarkofkane8167
    @markmarkofkane8167 Месяц назад +205

    If the supreme Court is supposed to defend the U.S. constitution, they should rule accordingly.

    • @duane1975
      @duane1975 Месяц назад +16

      ALL courts are suppose to defend the U.S. Constitution, but we all know how that goes!

    • @xxxlonewolf49
      @xxxlonewolf49 Месяц назад +14

      Congress is supposed to "support & defend the US CONSTITUTION" and yet they wrote & passed the NFA.

    • @hubertwalters4300
      @hubertwalters4300 Месяц назад +7

      ​@@xxxlonewolf49 And the GCA 1968,the Hughes Amendment, and the Boland Amendment,they also created the ATF.

    • @kellym3531
      @kellym3531 Месяц назад +9

      Some people on the Supreme Court have no clue where to find the Constitution.

    • @rdnowlin1206
      @rdnowlin1206 Месяц назад +5

      You would think with a 5.5 "conservative" majority these cases would've been ruled on and settled years ago!!

  • @tacticalmattfoley
    @tacticalmattfoley Месяц назад +140

    If a state could nullify any part of the Constitution or Bill of Rights, we'd still have people picking cotton for free.....

    • @antoniog4894
      @antoniog4894 Месяц назад

      Actually no, because those people have guns now and will stick a boot up their asses. Gun control has literally existed since America's inception. They justified it by saying black and natives were property so the Constitution didn't apply. Dredd Scott v Sanford

    • @Blgtn43
      @Blgtn43 Месяц назад +7

      Excellent point.

    • @TOWAINUS
      @TOWAINUS Месяц назад +12

      You just won the Internet Post of the Day award!

    • @magustrigger9195
      @magustrigger9195 Месяц назад +1

      Better times

    • @graybeardproductions2597
      @graybeardproductions2597 Месяц назад +3

      Point on

  • @krisswegemer1163
    @krisswegemer1163 Месяц назад +198

    SCOTUS must take up this case. States have no right to make unconstitutional laws. It is the Supreme Court's job to stop that from happening.

    • @freedomfighter1861
      @freedomfighter1861 Месяц назад

      Thats never stopped them before? The courts aren't gonna save us. Prepare accordingly!

    • @magustrigger9195
      @magustrigger9195 Месяц назад +9

      Ohhh and what if they dont?
      Do you really think ca/ny care what the court says?

    • @GentiluomoStraniero
      @GentiluomoStraniero Месяц назад +8

      ​@@magustrigger9195The People care what SCOTUS says.

    • @agentjohnson3973
      @agentjohnson3973 Месяц назад +5

      We don't have a 2nd amendment anymore

    • @jimfields9491
      @jimfields9491 Месяц назад +6

      @@magustrigger9195 and that’s why Ive been saying for decades that we need to kick Ca/NY and several other states out of the union.

  • @Hardcordell80
    @Hardcordell80 Месяц назад +65

    A quick rant from a California resident.
    I’m so sick of not being able to purchase flavored tobacco, order ammo online, purchase the type of firearm I want that isn’t on a fucking roster. I’m tired of all these decisions being made for me like we were fucking children. I see all these cool pew pews on line, and all I can do is dream. I’m fucking sick of it. Ok that’s my 2 cents. Thanks for listening. VOTE, VOTE, VOTE people! Donate money to GOA, FPC,CRPA, etc. Fire up the printers and let’s sue this state for infringing upon our basic human rights!!!!

    • @altonkriel
      @altonkriel Месяц назад

      Easy to say - But run far away from that FAILED State! what do you think the "genius" Gov Newsome is gonna do to you taxpayers with his massive multi billion deficit? that 24 billion is mysteriously just missing?

    • @ELCLAVE300
      @ELCLAVE300 Месяц назад +2

      💯

    • @zodaguado6655
      @zodaguado6655 Месяц назад +2

      Even if they take the case, California will make a new law stating they have to be carbon neutral or have a loaded chamber indicator

    • @tmango78
      @tmango78 Месяц назад +1

      I’m sick of it all as well. Have been for a long time. Donating to these groups will get us a lot farther than voting. Don’t get me wrong, I vote every single time,and we all need to, but I don’t expect it to change anything. Maybe one day we’ll have the numbers, or the uncorrupt system here, but I don’t see it happening anytime soon.

    • @zodaguado6655
      @zodaguado6655 Месяц назад

      @@tmango78 wrong wrong wrong, since the 9th circuit is ran by lefties, only trump can add more judges,,, god and Jesus can argue for the 2a community and the ninth will still swipe it down…. Most cases never make it out of the circuit court and their decision stands…. So donating will get you nowhere… better off with a gop president way better off…

  • @covertguy1575
    @covertguy1575 Месяц назад +108

    Ok. What the Supreme Court needs to do is take up one of these cases, absolutely destroy it and rule in favor of blocking any and all weapon and mag bans and rule that said bans are illegal and unconstitutional REGARDLESS of how any state attempts to word them…PERIOD.

    • @ratwynd
      @ratwynd Месяц назад

      AND those who attempt to implement un-Constitutional laws should be jailed for attempted sedition.
      Passing laws that violate the Constitution is a CRIME against the Constitution.

    • @casterakabadman805
      @casterakabadman805 Месяц назад +1

      EXACTLY, then outline the punishment in detail.

    • @JD-cz8sn
      @JD-cz8sn Месяц назад

      What they really need to do is let those of us affected by their unconstitutional laws is let us sue each person signing in favor of the law s personally for say $1000.00 per law maker per person affected

  • @user-fv1gq3yo5o
    @user-fv1gq3yo5o Месяц назад +83

    SHALL Not be Infringed

    • @AndieBlack13
      @AndieBlack13 Месяц назад +2

      This is an exacting definition of the wording, "infringement"....our founding fathers were well aware of how governments behave, the spiral into "redefining" things. The encroachment, the encirclement...the "testing" of the outer borders, looking for weaknesses or the possibilities of "reinterpretation" of wordings.

    • @kimmichaels899
      @kimmichaels899 Месяц назад

      ​@@AndieBlack13This is how authoritarianism started in china,Google, red shirts, untimidly this is the play book from china,brainwashed/indoctrinated our young folks. We need a miracle to.pull us from these weeds.

  • @pickeljarsforhillary102
    @pickeljarsforhillary102 Месяц назад +70

    Over 1 billion 30 round AR mags in citizen hands makes it well beyond common use.

    • @magustrigger9195
      @magustrigger9195 Месяц назад +5

      What does that matter?
      Do you really believe logic or precedent makes a difference?
      They make it up as they go
      Edit* spelling

    • @ThatOneGuyRichie
      @ThatOneGuyRichie Месяц назад +2

      They are trying to make it uncommon via artificial means.

    • @3istheanswer
      @3istheanswer Месяц назад +3

      Common use is gay. The 2a doesn’t say anything about “common use”. It says “shall not be infringed” we should be able to own any weapon whether in common use or not

    • @jimklemens5018
      @jimklemens5018 Месяц назад +1

      ​@@magustrigger9195 president?

    • @magustrigger9195
      @magustrigger9195 Месяц назад

      @jimklemens5018 precedent*
      I hit the wrong button on the spell check. Sorry for the confusion.

  • @steve-rr3nq
    @steve-rr3nq Месяц назад +38

    Since the senate decided they don’t have to obey the laws, why should we? Congress passes laws, but government people can decide on the spot, without any repercussions, to ignore, whatever they want. why should we obey?

    • @keithheinz1724
      @keithheinz1724 Месяц назад +6

      Then we should be able to remove those politicians out of office since they work gor United States citizens that are taxpayers of this country.

    • @GmanGSW
      @GmanGSW Месяц назад +3

      ​@@keithheinz1724I concur. More gun owners and believers in the Constitution should Vote out the incumbent anti-2A politicians, where applicable, putting in Constitutional politicians. Add term limits, as well!

    • @teresamoore15
      @teresamoore15 Месяц назад

      Weaver, Koresh and Malanowski.

  • @jdwar11
    @jdwar11 Месяц назад +25

    The bottom line it’s unconstitutional and the violators should face legal repercussions for their willful violations of protected rights

  • @_SLAVEONE_
    @_SLAVEONE_ Месяц назад +23

    It seems like for the past 10 years I constantly hear " the Supreme Court is taking on the assult weapons ban,the Supreme Court is taking on the magazine ban, the Supreme Court ruled against the magazine ban, the Supreme Court is taking on the magazine ban" WTF🤷‍♂️ How many time does the Court have to make a rule on the same thing?

    • @chrisflynn9695
      @chrisflynn9695 Месяц назад +2

      🤷 an infinite amount of times. They can rule tomorrow that no state can ban any gun or magazine capacity and these states will still find loopholes or just ignore it and just face the consequences later on down the road. The goal is to temporarily ban something they know is protected from being banned long enough to put companies out of business in their states.

    • @Mike-jf5ip
      @Mike-jf5ip Месяц назад +1

      What you keep seeing is these gun channels put up daily videos acting like we have a chance just for clicks. Look at all of the thumbnails for any of these channels. It's the same thumbnail daily as we still lose our rights. All that matters to this guy is his viewership and clicks.

    • @chrisflynn9695
      @chrisflynn9695 Месяц назад

      @@Mike-jf5ip 💯

    • @kimmichaels899
      @kimmichaels899 Месяц назад

      Nyc has been waiting 90 years to get their rights back the states already know this..
      Our state has had constitutional carry since the 1700s. Now they want to ban nearly every aspect of what has made us safe and free. No support group has been able to stop this tyrannical government from stripping our rights away little by little. Stay safe..

  • @Matt_justlikethat
    @Matt_justlikethat Месяц назад +46

    How many times do they have to keep ruling on these issues?? Wasn’t this addressed before???

    • @justa.american8303
      @justa.american8303 Месяц назад

      Yes, but after they disarm us, they will have more infringements on our Rights.

    • @brianstamm1314
      @brianstamm1314 Месяц назад +4

      Bruen was supposed to cover ALL gun laws. The lower courts keep ignoring that ruling on purpose.

  • @tumblingdice7114
    @tumblingdice7114 Месяц назад +27

    Included NEW York State too please. Tired of living behind enemy lines.

    • @commonsence8223
      @commonsence8223 Месяц назад +4

      Seriously. The infringements need to end.

    • @jdawg4219
      @jdawg4219 Месяц назад +4

      There are plenty of NYC gun owners that want to own modern sporting rifles too

  • @paulbegley1464
    @paulbegley1464 Месяц назад +35

    Well in California our judges keep delaying justice with only a few exceptions and Newsom attack's them

    • @joemcmurray9138
      @joemcmurray9138 Месяц назад

      Impeach Newsome, that would solve your problems.

  • @dragonf1092
    @dragonf1092 Месяц назад +12

    They are also guilty of felony crimes in violation of Title 18 U.S.C. section 241 conspiracy against rights and Title 18 U.S.C. section 242 deprivation of rights under color of law.

  • @albedo0.392
    @albedo0.392 Месяц назад +83

    ARE THEY GOING TO RESPECT THE CONSTITUTION? WE LIVE IN A POST CONSTITUTIONAL ERA.

    • @freedomfighter1861
      @freedomfighter1861 Месяц назад +7

      Who cares what they do or dont, just live free!

    • @lonniebeal6032
      @lonniebeal6032 Месяц назад +2

      @@freedomfighter1861 Because I'd rather pay $400 for a 5.7 than $800 just because the $400 one has a 20 round mag...

    • @JSmith-ou3sk
      @JSmith-ou3sk Месяц назад +2

      Only if we continue to allow it.

    • @youngsquidling2545
      @youngsquidling2545 Месяц назад +1

      I would love to live free but I can't in Washington

    • @Nileking300
      @Nileking300 Месяц назад

      It’s the time where a Civil War may erupt

  • @dannyhonn973
    @dannyhonn973 Месяц назад +40

    Even if SCOTUS rules in favor of pro 2A, Pritzker will ignore it.

    • @antoniog4894
      @antoniog4894 Месяц назад +8

      He wipes his ass with the US Constitution.

    • @dragonf1092
      @dragonf1092 Месяц назад

      And that's why pritzker and newsom, governor's of new York and new Mexico are trespassers of their offices illegally holding their offices and should be in a prison cell. But the justice department (courts)are corrupt and don't do their jobs.

    • @hubertwalters4300
      @hubertwalters4300 Месяц назад +5

      He will be sued into compliance.

    • @PenTheMighty
      @PenTheMighty Месяц назад +2

      It won't matter if Pritzker ignores it, once unconstitutional, those cases will quickly get overturned on appeal. If the government continues to defy SCOTUS after that, then anyone still relying on these laws can get sued for A LOT of money. At worst, resistance will be 2-5 years after the ruling.
      Oregon overturning its mag ban will have ramifications going forward, as it's in the 9th Circuit's jurisdiction. The cases before SCOTUS will cite that ruling as an example of a state following Bruen as SCOTUS stated. It's going to get ugly before it gets better but, the more they resist, the stronger the cases against them when all the FFLs and private citizens sue for damages. Stores have closed, some have lost a majority of their income, there will be damages that they can prove, the longer these laws are on the books.
      There is a light at the end of the tunnel but it depends on how it's ruled and if an AWB will make it to SCOTUS. It's also a ruling that would effect the laws of 11 states. That's not something to take lightly and SCOTUS realizes it, especially with the litany of buzzwords, jargon, and half-baked arguments utilized by anti-gun lawyers and AGs. It's not just enough to state "This is Unconstitutional" but "Why". This is what Bruen has set up but there are something like 7-12 different bizarre arguments as to why AWBs don't violate the Constitution. All of those issues would have to be addressed in writing and that takes time. SCOTUS has aides who comb through history books and law books to sift through all of the madness. And they are usually doing this for multiple cases at a time.
      It takes months to review all the facts of a given case, and that's with multiple people working on it for hours at a time. We also must remember that these people do not necessarily share the intensity of appreciation for the 2nd Amendment as we do. That doesn't make them traitors, it just makes guns "not their thing" and so for a lot of the people doing research into these topics, it's the first time they've ever been exposed to firearms and the mechanics of their function. This is why most of the cases involving firearms are about the individuals, rather than the regulation of firearms themselves.
      The main case SCOTUS is hearing on the 2nd involves whether or not being having a restraining order means you can't own guns. There are multiple pending cases in review; losing gun rights over protective orders (Actually really important), owning firearms while using (or addicted to) an unlawful substance, and whether or not being imprisoned for longer than 1 year means you lose your rights (as a non-violent felon).
      Notice none of those involve AWBs? They all are about the individual and their legally gray status on owning firearms.
      If SCOTUS states that AWBs are on their face, violations of the US Constitution, that is the nationwide silver bullet. No state can enforce their AWBs, regardless of what their AGs and Governors want. They however, have to pick up an AWB case.
      If they just rule in a single case, that a specific law is unconstitutional (this is more likely with the 7th Circuit) then that state is free and clear but everyone else is still screwed and it means that each state will have to have a case go before SCOTUS to see their bans struck down. States can also pass these laws again, reworded or with different arguments. It depends on how SCOTUS rules just as much as if they do.
      Yes, this is complicated and infuriating that laws can take away our rights so quickly but the courts move as slow as they do. Until they need to pass more anti-gun legislation and suddenly government works at light speed all over again.
      Now, there are SOME thing that we can do in the meantime. If you live in an AWB or Mag ban state, vote for an AG that will refuse to enforce unconstitutional laws. That's a quick and dirty way to offer some reprieve from these laws. Governor is next up, same idea. Then, push for signatures to get laws on the vote to repeal your AWBs. This is actually MUCH easier than waiting for SCOTUS to take a case and faster as well, because it allows you to take your frustration and anger and do something with it.
      Volunteer to canvas in a ban-state. Donate to various legal groups fighting these laws. Run for office (Herrera did it).
      No one is coming to save us. It's up to us to get this job done.

    • @morganlove3576
      @morganlove3576 Месяц назад

      He needs to go to jail 18 US § 241 , 242

  • @Blgtn43
    @Blgtn43 Месяц назад +12

    "Shall not be infringed" was not a suggestion. It was a directive.

    • @magustrigger9195
      @magustrigger9195 Месяц назад +2

      Are you suggesting it matters to them?
      Unless action occurs its all words and voting surely doesnt change crap

    • @Blgtn43
      @Blgtn43 Месяц назад

      @magustrigger9195 I have been saying for years, we need to organize on a national level. Under one command structure.

  • @D70340
    @D70340 Месяц назад +4

    I'm tired of the SCOTUS leaving the door cracked open in EVERY CASE just so the tyrants can continue to keep infringing. It flat out tells you that they are ALL in bed together because they never close and lock the door!

  • @TheHarleywolf
    @TheHarleywolf Месяц назад +7

    SCOTUS has already ruled arms in common use for lawful purposes CANNOT be banned. The court needs to slap these states with contempt charges as soon as the law gets signed.

  • @jimvandemoter6961
    @jimvandemoter6961 Месяц назад +8

    Sadly there are justises on the Supreme Court who think the Bill Of Rights is more the bill of suggestions. That's why I don't think anything is going to happen in our favor.

  • @dtna
    @dtna Месяц назад +3

    Not just CA. Several other states, too. It's about time! 😢

  • @vikingoutlaw9
    @vikingoutlaw9 Месяц назад +11

    SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. PERIOD. AMERICA. 🤠

    • @magustrigger9195
      @magustrigger9195 Месяц назад

      Hahaha you think it matters to them?
      Unless you're willing to act its all just paper

    • @vikingoutlaw9
      @vikingoutlaw9 Месяц назад

      @@magustrigger9195 What’s your definition of “act”

    • @mitchconner6831
      @mitchconner6831 Месяц назад +1

      @@magustrigger9195nice fed post

    • @magustrigger9195
      @magustrigger9195 Месяц назад

      @vikingoutlaw9 Well, my joking response was censured
      But this is not the venue

  • @bobstaurovsky3506
    @bobstaurovsky3506 Месяц назад +5

    Take up Connecticut’s ban too !!!

  • @mikedegnan5252
    @mikedegnan5252 Месяц назад +3

    All the supreme court needs to say is shall not be infringed means never to be touched, inhibited, or construed in any way besides hands off.

  • @vincedibona4687
    @vincedibona4687 Месяц назад +8

    Thanks for keeping us informed, Jared!

  • @doublezzranch849
    @doublezzranch849 Месяц назад +8

    I thought this was all handled already once & for all?

  • @wildcat8598
    @wildcat8598 Месяц назад +3

    The fact that this is even an issue shows we as Americans have failed to keep these evil POS politicians in their place.

  • @deniseprettner2020
    @deniseprettner2020 Месяц назад +3

    I have no faith in any court these days.

  • @jdawg4219
    @jdawg4219 Месяц назад +3

    It’s been decades of not having 2nd amendment rights in NYC. It’s time for all NY gun owners to finally get their rights back.

  • @kingofkingsmoonpie4075
    @kingofkingsmoonpie4075 Месяц назад +3

    Hey Jared, Washington state had a 88 minute magazine freedom. But our AG in Washington state had a commissioner stayed the order who is a hard-core Democrat that is not even a judge on the wa Supreme Court.

  • @sethbranam9068
    @sethbranam9068 Месяц назад +2

    Shall not be infringed!

  • @Portuguese-linguica
    @Portuguese-linguica Месяц назад +5

    You forgot about the California case to.

  • @pauldievendorfjr4109
    @pauldievendorfjr4109 Месяц назад +3

    I also think is great that most of the Sheriffs of Illinos are not complying the ban !!!!

  • @marcmmclellan
    @marcmmclellan Месяц назад +2

    They absolutely should! But their handlers won’t allow it…

  • @hakimcameldriver
    @hakimcameldriver Месяц назад +2

    SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED IS AN ORDER TO GOVERNMENT, IT SHOULDNOT NEED TO GO BEFORE THE COURT EXCEPT TO PASS SENTENCE ON POLITICIANS WHO TRY TO INFRINGE ON THE SECOND AMENDMENT.

  • @red9man2130
    @red9man2130 Месяц назад +18

    NOPE! COWARDICE and STATISM will rule the day!

  • @shooter853
    @shooter853 Месяц назад +2

    No they won't. They'll hide and claim that the petition has to go thru the regular channels.Which is an ENDLESS merry-Go-Round.

  • @red9man2130
    @red9man2130 Месяц назад +7

    RUclips censored my comment!

    • @vincedibona4687
      @vincedibona4687 Месяц назад +5

      Yet the porno spambots invade every video and short. 😡

  • @redmesa2975
    @redmesa2975 Месяц назад +2

    I live in Colorado. We are heading that way too ! Not good !

    • @junicohen7918
      @junicohen7918 Месяц назад

      Never should have legalized weed

  • @curly__3
    @curly__3 Месяц назад +1

    The states and local governments explicitly do not have the right or jurisdiction to enforce anything having to do with weapons or the use or carry of weapons. That all falls under federal jurisdiction because that is a federally enumerated right and federal law. Allowing state and local governments to change and modify our rights and forcing citizens to assert their rights in court costing 10's or 100's of thousands of dollars, jail time or even costing their lives to do so is not legal. It is criminal. In order for the Constitution to be law and for the bill of rights to be law, they must be congruent on every square inch of US owned territory. PERIOD.

  • @pauldievendorfjr4109
    @pauldievendorfjr4109 Месяц назад +2

    I hope one case is taken by SCOTUS, it would settle the debate on AWBs.

  • @lokiluck3216
    @lokiluck3216 Месяц назад +1

    These impaired contracts violate their State Constitutions, void & without force.

  • @andrewmattila1918
    @andrewmattila1918 Месяц назад

    Shall Not Be Infringed!!

  • @marktisdale7935
    @marktisdale7935 Месяц назад

    The SCOTUS needs to take the Illinois cases up since it will also bring magazine bans into the case.

  • @ridinlow01
    @ridinlow01 Месяц назад +5

    CT needs to have there "ruling" challenged

    • @Jelectric33
      @Jelectric33 Месяц назад

      Yes but nobody here will overturn . If the Supreme Court just does it CT will have to give them back too . Mags and ars. We want it national

    • @ridinlow01
      @ridinlow01 Месяц назад

      @Jelectric33 oh I know. Tomorrow is due date for all reg of assault weapons. First I heard of it. Guess I'll be on the non comply list....

    • @teresamoore15
      @teresamoore15 Месяц назад

      ​@@ridinlow01It's called a "hit list".

    • @ridinlow01
      @ridinlow01 Месяц назад

      @@teresamoore15 I feel like they already have a hit list. Anytime we purchased, we had to call and verify the cereal wasn't stolen, so I feel like they already got a list of everything we have

    • @Jelectric33
      @Jelectric33 Месяц назад

      If it's already registered you may as well get the "assault" certificate

  • @erichendley3174
    @erichendley3174 Месяц назад

    Will it make a difference? These states are already ignoring Heller and Bruen. Why would they uphold what the Supreme Court says about this?

  • @andrewmattila1918
    @andrewmattila1918 Месяц назад

    “When tyranny becomes law, rebellion becomes duty.” Thomas Jefferson

  • @billy19461
    @billy19461 Месяц назад

    What happens if a state just ignores the Supreme Court’s ruling?

  • @Eddie87Grant
    @Eddie87Grant Месяц назад +1

    Thanks Jared. I’m hailing from Connecticut. I’m also a plaintiff in a very similar case there too. It’s time SCOTUS takes up these so called AWB and MCB cases.

  • @ChiefMiddleFinger
    @ChiefMiddleFinger Месяц назад +1

    The 2nd Amendment says what it says. Every gun law, restriction or regulation that came after is extra-judicial. This means illegal.

  • @2AFreeState
    @2AFreeState Месяц назад

    As a Marylander, I hope the supreme court takes up these cases. The Maryland government has seriously overstepped its bounds.These gun laws we have are unconstitutional bills that the Maryland State government pretends are laws. No bill spends any time of its life as a law if it is in conflict with a higher law. This is what Chief Justice Marshall found in 1803 in Marbury vs. Madison. The supreme court needs tell the State of Maryland it can't ban weapons from anybody who isn't already serving time as a convicted criminal. The only exception to the 2nd amendment is the 13th amendment. Otherwise, it is absolute.

  • @NedReck6967
    @NedReck6967 Месяц назад +4

    The State of Washington upheld their magazine ban.

    • @jbirkins
      @jbirkins Месяц назад +1

      Not yet. Circuit court judge found it unconstitutional and tried to end it, and what amounts to a clerk in the WA SC issued an injunction keeping it in place until the SC can rule. Nonsense? yes. Will the WA SC find in favor of banning? Probably. If the IL ban gets struck down before the WA SC rules, that may dissuade the WA SC from making themselves look stupid.

    • @dragonf1092
      @dragonf1092 Месяц назад

      The state of Washington is committing High Treason insurrecting against the constitution of the united states.

    • @lonniebeal6032
      @lonniebeal6032 Месяц назад

      @@jbirkins I'm here in shitehole corrupt WA, and I thought I already read WA supreme court upheld the ban. So many guns can't be sold here due to that BS ban and I'd like to see it gone. I thought it was headed to SCOTUS. But we'll see.

  • @cldfactor
    @cldfactor Месяц назад +1

    So why do we allow these unconstitutional laws on us the people ?
    Why... Is politicking over our rights even a thing ?

  • @flybouy11
    @flybouy11 Месяц назад

    SCOTUS only takes 70-90 cases per year.

  • @lamont5050
    @lamont5050 Месяц назад

    40 years I Have been waiting for this, I hope Scotus will take at least one case up.

  • @timothyulrich395
    @timothyulrich395 Месяц назад

    SCOTUS needs to!

  • @richardmmarcus1
    @richardmmarcus1 Месяц назад +1

    My finger is machine-gun like...ban all fingers. 7th circuit is a violation

  • @dennisduffey2053
    @dennisduffey2053 Месяц назад

    I hope so badly they take up one of these cases because here in Illinois it’s out of control.

  • @user-tb6tz8vo4k
    @user-tb6tz8vo4k Месяц назад

    Never trust any court.

  • @bobwiese6128
    @bobwiese6128 Месяц назад

    Thank you, brother.

  • @billpuit6231
    @billpuit6231 Месяц назад

    Thank you Jared

  • @fatgreyman183
    @fatgreyman183 Месяц назад

    Thank You Jared 👍😎👍

  • @red9man2130
    @red9man2130 Месяц назад +10

    AGAIN! MY comment was BLOCKED!

    • @tigerman3
      @tigerman3 Месяц назад +4

      It's happened to me too. The speech nannies fear speaking truth.

    • @justnana2256
      @justnana2256 Месяц назад +3

      Join the club. My comments have often disappeared even after receiving replies. When that doesn't work because I often go back and repost, I receive a 24 hour no comment time-out. I am very careful about how I say things but of course RUclips doesn't have to let you know why. 👍❤️🇺🇲 FJB

    • @freedomfighter1861
      @freedomfighter1861 Месяц назад +2

      Welcome to the shadows my friend!

    • @earltate56
      @earltate56 Месяц назад

      There's no way the Supreme Court is going to take this case.

    • @mitchelldarnell5334
      @mitchelldarnell5334 Месяц назад

      So much for freedom of speech, the algorithm is built to just that, it's AI AT WORK... Cain't stand dictators,,,,,

  • @johnwow4u
    @johnwow4u Месяц назад

    Thanks, Jared!

  • @dfb1111
    @dfb1111 Месяц назад

    Thank you

  • @edcox8007
    @edcox8007 Месяц назад

    If I remember correctly the Maryland case( Bianchi v Brown) and a California case (Duncan v Bonta) were remanded back to circuit courts to be reheard in light of Bruen. These cases need to be heard by the SCOTUS as the circuits flipped the middle finger at SCOTUS for the Bruen decision.

  • @Kylecombes4
    @Kylecombes4 Месяц назад

    Thanks Jared

  • @user-zg9sz7vk3g
    @user-zg9sz7vk3g Месяц назад

    I just wanted to thank you for keeping us updated and in the know…..you had told Alabama that we had gun control bills that we needed to call about…..I did so! Thanks for the heads up!!

  • @sharrykitz9231
    @sharrykitz9231 Месяц назад

    It could just take up the NFA and be done with all of this nonsense forever

  • @Werewolf_Six
    @Werewolf_Six Месяц назад

    Thank you for keeping Illinois gun news 'active' in the public conscience. We're really hurting in The People's Republik of Illinois, Jared, so your help is really appreciated.

  • @frazeeken
    @frazeeken Месяц назад +13

    Machine guns are not banned, you have to pay a tax to have them.

    • @freedomfighter1861
      @freedomfighter1861 Месяц назад +2

      which is also unconstitutional

    • @pattycakes456
      @pattycakes456 Месяц назад +1

      Yes, money makes everything safer. If it can't be taxed, gov't says it's too dangerous.

    • @maynardcarmer3148
      @maynardcarmer3148 Месяц назад

      @frazeeken
      Okay; voting isn't banned either. Are you all right with paying a tax to vote?

    • @frazeeken
      @frazeeken Месяц назад

      Was stating that since machine guns are not banned that being machine gun like can't be a reason for banning

    • @dragonf1092
      @dragonf1092 Месяц назад +1

      Which is unconstitutional therefore illegal in violation of the 9th amendment enumeration clause, article 4 section 2 paragraph 1,14th amendment section 1,2nd amendment.

  • @user-xz4oq8qt4o
    @user-xz4oq8qt4o Месяц назад

    Another great program my friend. be well.

  • @susanliggett3982
    @susanliggett3982 Месяц назад

    Spot on.

  • @curly__3
    @curly__3 Месяц назад

    That's a sweet sale at sportsman guide! Thanks!

  • @davidhandyman7571
    @davidhandyman7571 Месяц назад

    With so many cases, surely, they will take one and bundle the rest into the final ruling.

  • @zparkerdrifts
    @zparkerdrifts Месяц назад

    29 States have also filed amicus briefs for Illinois saying that the supreme court should take these cases up. We also have a case in the southern district that the judge said will be on the merits this time. (he’s the one who gave the injunction) And that will be in June.

  • @goldentrichomeshydro4260
    @goldentrichomeshydro4260 Месяц назад +1

    Don't forget Colorado right now...

    • @teddibear1943
      @teddibear1943 Месяц назад

      Cuckorado. Get your shit before Aug 1. They just keep piling it on, started in Sept 2013. We will make it through this as well. Stay safe!

  • @TERRY-cb2ku
    @TERRY-cb2ku Месяц назад

    Blessed Sunday to you.

  • @blindrodent3019
    @blindrodent3019 Месяц назад

    This is an easy question. "Did they Use a Weapon that is readily aviallable"? They know that that it is, and thus "Protected". They Fear it....

  • @MrCrimenews
    @MrCrimenews Месяц назад

    Bruen precludes using today’s “Public safety” excuse to ban Weapons.

  • @roblowe9283
    @roblowe9283 Месяц назад

    Keep up the good work !!!!!!

  • @benjaminkiser2938
    @benjaminkiser2938 Месяц назад

    These people will not stop violating your rights untill there are serious consequences for doing so.

  • @davidseale6104
    @davidseale6104 Месяц назад

    I'm sending to you Jared!

  • @dalestark3343
    @dalestark3343 Месяц назад

    Let's hope they pick it up and render the correct decision!! Busting those algorithms!!

  • @williamfender661
    @williamfender661 Месяц назад

    If they don't take these cases up, which violate their recent decision, then they are doing we the people an injustice. At this point, they become a liability to we the people.

  • @larrymota
    @larrymota Месяц назад

    Hornady can pound sand. I have not forgotten.

  • @MontanaTactical
    @MontanaTactical Месяц назад

    They we punt again. I have little faith in them. Have to keep our fingers crossed.

  • @user-55685
    @user-55685 Месяц назад

    Sportsman's guide turns over their records to ATF and FBI

  • @ralphcurran8147
    @ralphcurran8147 Месяц назад

    Great content

  • @sharedgoogleyoutubeaccount3662
    @sharedgoogleyoutubeaccount3662 Месяц назад

    Good vid! 👍

  • @morthomer5804
    @morthomer5804 Месяц назад

    There doesn't have to be "windows of opportunity" for anti-freedom groups to file suit. Filing lawsuits is job security for their PAC's.

  • @NYRM1974
    @NYRM1974 Месяц назад

    All 50 states and territory should be allowed to exercise their 2nd Amendment gun rights including ownership of an AR-15 or AOW with standard capacity magazine

  • @Laszlo34
    @Laszlo34 Месяц назад

    Gun Gag 5?!? That sounds like that one night I spent in a very, very strange nightclub.

  • @privatesector0422
    @privatesector0422 Месяц назад

    Are there going to continuously do everything in their power to infringe on our rights...

  • @TractorWrangler01
    @TractorWrangler01 Месяц назад

    Remember the Poptart? Was that machinegun like?

  • @RamblinRoadies
    @RamblinRoadies Месяц назад

    This is long overdue.

  • @Scott-lz3pp
    @Scott-lz3pp Месяц назад

    Love ya, man. Been on this channel for a long time. Also tried my first Blackout coffee (instant). Used two packets instead of one, and it was great. Might have to buy myself another bottle of Kahlua for it! (I'm retired so no more alcohol/drug testing for me! And I had to sell my car, so...).

  • @jerrypeal653
    @jerrypeal653 Месяц назад

    No consequences it won’t stop !