@@tgs9740 hence, “people.” For the left, the people are the individual citizens-make that persons-EVERYWHERE in the Constitution, EXCEPT in the 2A. Amazable!
U.S.M.C. MARINE VETERAN: (America is upside down!) 50 YEARS AGO, I received my DUI 3rd victimless offense after serving (6) years as a young Marine during the Iranian crisis in (1979) returning to civilian life was difficult! Ironically, all three victimless offenses occurred that same year I was “honorably discharged” (1979) The victimless DUIs took place before meeting my wife, having children, and now grandchildren. (Age 25 at the time, today I'm 67) DUI offenses that are victimless without incident, accident, or damaged party should never be an eternal lifetime 2-A 100+ year ban! Title 18 922(g)(1) Requires Review because, the only damaged party was an "Honorably Discharged United States Marine"! - USMC (Semper Fidelis) SGT E-5 (5811) TRUMP/VANCE FOR PRESIDENT ...
Their only authority comes from your willingness to submit, and the willingness of ANTI-American Traitors to celebrate them for tyrannizing you on their Collective behalf. Only God can pull our Plugs at will. Mankind has to employ Violence of Action to enforce THEIR will against us; be that will singular, or Collective. Ain't Democracy Grand?b
"Know your Enemy!" -- Zach de la Rocha Remember always, Truth is Light and VERMIN are very afraid of operating in the Light. Judge a Tree by its Fruits and NOT by the socially engineered and moronically popularized peer-pressures to ignore the same.
They tell you that you should only have a firearm if you have training. Then they tell you your training is the reason you’re being investigated, prosecuted, and convicted when you need to use your firearm in self defense. We need to stand firm on the wording of the second amendment. But also, vote with your wallet, people. That’s how you get businesses to change their mind.
@@loffy742yes it is the government.. but who holds the most influence? Businesses do because they just keep throwing money at it until they get their way.
They are being cagey for a few reasons. A) the democrats have come right out and stated they will pack the court if they don't get their way. This will have a nullifying effect on a lot of decisions and they have to put decisions into rather obtuse language. B) Chief Judge Roberts is trying to set up his legacy and does not want to have a bad reputation once he is gone therefore he tries to hit the middle without trampling the Constitution completely. I don't like it but I do understand what they are trying to do.
And as an American male from the age of 18 the government must recognize you as a militia member. Selective service... And well it's a government agency so based on history and tradition we know government agencies like to retain all data even beyond the allowable times. What was it the ATF last used? "Well we have it but we don't look at it."...
The right to “keep and bear Arms” was included as a means to accomplish the objective of a “well regulated Militia”-to provide for the defense of the nation, to provide a well-trained and disciplined force to check federal tyranny, and to bring constitutional balance by distributing the power equally
“ A well-regulated militia,” means a well-trained and equipped people. If we allow a municipality to override a constitutionally-protected right, then rights only exist as long as government allows it. In that case, we have no rights.
well thats already the case. why on earth have we not enacted the Declaration of independence is beyond me bc that's how we restore the rights to the people back from government. "Whenever the people are well informed, they can be trusted with their own government; that whenever things get so far wrong as to attract their notice, they may be relied on to set them to rights." “Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the citizenry.” “When a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government” “All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.” ― Thomas Jefferson
Politicians at all levels have been trampling on freedom of speech and property rights for years. We need a permanent defense against our basic rights.
A gun range near where I live was shut down for "environmental and noise pollution". This occurred in NorCal. Mind you there was no actual pollution, just the premise there "could be" pollution by the lead from bullets. And the noise? They claimed it disturbed the non-existent people living nearby whom the closest lived 4 miles away. The range was nestled in a valley with several hills blocking sound in every direction. You couldn't even hear the gun shots from the main road that went by the range. It was quite literally in the perfect spot for a range. But the green wackadoodles decided they knew best. For the birds and the bees they decided!
I know in my heart that there are many, many freedom-loving Californians. What I don't know is why, year after year, they don't put minor differences aside and vote in state assemblymen/women who, while maybe not lining up point-for-point on EVERY issue, agree with them on more or most of their deeply-held positions re: freedom and individual liberty? Why do they keep sending 🤡college graduates to Sacramento to implement their Marxist agenda for the once great state of California? Why????? Instead of forming coalitions who agree on the major issues, it seems that every conservative in Cali only wants a candidate who EXACTLY matches his/her on EVERY pet issue. If they find even one divergence, they either vote for a sure loser or don't vote at all, which is the same as voting (D) and empowering them further. OR, they move to another state, where they think the grass will be greener and end up missing some of Cali's social welfare schemes to much that they work to pollute their new home with such drivel. Cali doesn't have to be abandoned to the whacky, lunatic left - it can be salvaged, but that's not going to happen until and unless those who take exception to the new Bolshevik's plans for the state band together the way that the (D)s do, knock off the infighting, and start fielding some candidates that can get California back on track before it goes off the edge of a busted trestle and into a deep, rocky canyon from which there can be no rescue. Just my opinion, and it's worth every penny that you paid for it.
I have to wonder if that sheriff is going to actually enforce it. The cops in norcal are generally pro 2a as they are among the more conservative Californians.
The Gun Control groups will be using the "lead is a poisonous chemical" as a means of shutting down ranges and banning the use of lead for bullets. NO LEAD NO BULLETS. Use copper they declare, use bismuth they say. Those metals are prohibitively expensive to launch down range to punch holes in targets.
Of course, training is protected! Right there in the phrase "well-regulated." How can we be well-regulated (well suited for the task of militias) if we can't train?
exactly. but they tend to not focus on that part of the amendment and just the part saying "the people to keep and bear Arms" and then argue that we barely have that right wail leaving out the part saying "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right," and also leaving out, "shall not be infringed." in other words they cherry pick.
Because the Collective [now] matters MORE than the Individual. The Reconstruction reverted us back to an "energetic" Centralized Government, in order to undo the protections of the Antifederalist' "Bill of Rights" and to exalt Hamilton's originally failed proposals as Dominant and Enforceable. The traitors won the first CW, but they'll lose the next.
The main point is the government isn't required to allow a commercial use on residential/agricultural zoned land. I don't think the 1000 yds played into it too much.
It seems that many towns and cities annex ( claim control) over land well away from the dense population areas. People need to succeed from these towns, counties and ( as we're seeing in eastern Oregon) states to secure their freedoms.
@@Franimus seems they just don't want people to be ready to be attacked by their own government. and its not commercial use if its you alone shooting in your back yard.
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the Right of The People shall not be infringed. I think the liberty side of the coin is more important. If things continue the way they are, this will all come to a head during this generation.
Tom, Thank you for the discussion, much appreciated my 2A friend. The legislators, city-state-federal, need a better understanding of the word infringement. Thank goodness the SCOTUS gets it. The existing “sensitive places” restrictions should be their next target. -Jim
I see nothing in the second amendment that would lead me to believe that the government has the right to infringe on my use of a gun including training at whatever distance I wish to.
The court said they could have their 1000yd range, just not as a business. They could allow friends and family to use it. So, what precludes them from opening a private fraternal club for "The League Of Friends" that offers daily, weekly, monthly, yearly or whatever membership levels for access to the club-house? Club members are all friends! Says so, right there in the club name!
If businesses are permitted to commercialize things that are not protected, they must allow the commercialization of things that are protected. You can publish anything you choose but you can't sell them? You can sell ice cream and sports equipment but not newspapers and magazines and movies on DVD and music on CD?
You are 100% correct, IMO, on the "liberty vs. crime" interpretation of 2A associated needs. I don't need to shoot at 1,000 yards if we're talking about preparing for hunting or even competitive shooting. And I understand it when you say the "other part" is, for some, uncomfortable to discuss. But so is the possibility of a government becoming one of tyranny. Makes me uncomfortable to think of, but makes defending against it an absolute necessity. Thanks for a great discussion, and God bless you!
So, what meanings did the word "regulated" possess in 1791, specific to firearms or those using them in defense of the "security of a free state"? Within the lexicon of firearms-related terms, "regulated" meant, as it always has, that a firearm was "sighted in";' that the sights were properly adjusted so that its projectiles would hit the intended target where the user of the arm intended them to hit. In order for militia members to be effective, their arms necessarily would have to have been "well-regulated". It's a perfectly acceptable term to use for sights that are properly adjusted.
@@vayabroder729 Militia members in those days were farmers, tradesmen, average citizens, not professional soldiers. You can bet your bottom dollar that many, if not most, were hunters as well, that being the best means at the time of procuring protein for the family table. There were no CVS, Win Dixie, Food Giant, Albertsons, Safeway, etc. back then. Those guys knew their way around a Kentucky long rifle or a squirrel gun.
If you accept the 6th circuit’s opinion, their rationale would allow banning of gun dealers and sales. Additionally, 1000+ yards would be a “reasonable” range for many hunting scenarios.
Thanks Tom for another great video. Keep up the good work. Hope to see you again in class someday soon. Keep us posted when your next classes. Thanks. Have a great day.
I am for training! I am a registered nurse and have been so for over 40 years. I went to Nursing School, obtained a state license to practice, and take the required numbers of hours to keep current every two years and renew my license every two years! I also hold a concealed carry permit in two states with reciprocity allows my to legally in 43 states. I also do training and proficiency exams every two years and actual physical classroom plus proficiency tests every four years. I am all for training for every gun owner.
You're right, but we shouldn't have "get around"... If voting at the ballot box keeps NOT WORKING we'll have to use the Second Amendment for its original intended use. Remember, judge's terms expire when they do.
I'd have to ask of the court: exactly what's the maximum distance acceptable for armed confrontation? 500 yds? 10 yds? What an absurdly specious argument to try to restrict our 2A rights.
I’m just gonna put this out there for fun! Ammunition is covered under the second amendment. This is because without ammunition there is no explosive in a gun and a firearm is defined as any weapon that uses the force or an explosive. Without ammo, a gun is not a firearm, I don’t know why this hasn’t been used to challenge the ammo background check laws and taxes
Zoning laws in general need to have a constitutional review... There are plenty of cities that have outlawed retail businesses just because they have FFL licenses and are selling firearms. They're basically banning the sale of firearms in their community using zoning laws.
Tom, with great respect for- and appreciation of - your legal expertise and your small arms knowledge, I want to caution strongly that constraining any Second Amendment question only to criminal defense or to sustaining liberty is both: (a) wholly unintended by our Founders and (b) provides those who oppose the Second Amendment with concessions and constraints that are unwise and myopic. Initially, one could ask aren’t firearms reasonably and lawfully used for hunting (sometimes at 1,000+ yard ranges), for plinking, for recreational target shooting, and for sporting contests (ranging from skeet and trap, to IDPA, to exceptionally long range “bullseye” rifle competitions)? The foregoing examples are not easily included in either “Liberty” or “Criminals” categories, yet they certainly are enduring, historical and entirely valid uses of firearms. Furthermore, our Founders’ inclusion of the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights was intended to incorporate evolutionary changes to firearms, ammunition, sights, powder, and so forth. Any individuals who doubt this must then logically assess if Freedom of Expression applies only to the spoken word (obviously, no radios, televisions, cable connections, internet news apps, etc. existed in the Eighteenth Century) and if Freedom of the Press is limited to newspapers and pamphlets (once again, no podcasts, internet news channels, radio, television, cable, and so forth in the 1700’s). Therefore, if 2A critics suggest that the freedom to keep and bear arms is relevant only to “Liberty” and “Criminals,” then - by their precise logic - Freedom of the Press must exclude all non-print media and Freedom of Expression must be inapplicable to all non-spoken communications. To summarize, PLEASE DON’T restrict our Second Amendment liberties to only two usage categories AND PLEASE DON’T allow our adversaries to circumscribe evolutionary advances to any of our fundamental liberties (e.g., Freedom of Expression and Freedom of the Press were fundamental to Murrow’s World War II radio journalism from London and to Cronkite’s reporting on the CBS TV’s Evening News).
Gun ranges and training minimizes accidents because you’re responsible for every round leaving barrel meaning your life depends on you keeping shots on target. Plus you have to get to know your guns in order to be comfortable with it and always be able to be safe and maintain and repair. One of the biggest things are getting to know your guns and being comfortable with it making gun ranges extremely important
Curiousity here. Would not the city gain monetarily from the range through taxes and such? Seems like they don't want the extra money, or do they think they'll have to spend it on additional policing, etc.?
Yes how do you draw a line on distance for training weather it’s a hand gun or rifle we train with both. Criminals are shooting from longer distances because people are training with their guns and trying to stay out of jail by missing the criminal and hitting an innocent person.
If commercial training facilities can be disallowed, how can people get competent training? Long range competency requires long range training facilities. The retired Civil War military officers who established the NRA wanted to facilitate public long range arms competency needed for future military (militia) service.
When are you going to cover the Everard-Grisham v. Olmos Park out of the 5th circuit case? The 5th circuit ruled that an individual may call 911, and without stating a crime or saying they are in fear, make the legal open carry of a firearm unlawful.
Liberty. Unless you are infringing on the rights of another, you are free to do what you want, when you want. The government can't disallow an activity on a whim. 🇺🇸
If the government assertion in US vs Miller is that military arms are the only arms protected by the 2nd amendment for private use, then would military training not also be the regulations protected by the second amendment for private use? I mean the second amendment doesnt just say Arms, it also says regulations(IE training and equipment/supplies related to arms)
Also, from the customers' perspective, you have the right to practice long range marksmanship, but only if you can buy your own several-hundred acre range. That is not a reasonable burden to put on the right. There must be an allowance for publicly accessable facilities.
Would they be able to do a club membership that allows club members range time? Or would that still have to be zoned commercial? Or would that depend on state law?
Random question in regards to CCW and Carry Permits for a security person in wisconsin. In SPS 34.01 it makes it sound like if you have a CCW you dont need to obtain a carry permit for private security persons. Is that true? I was refered to here to ask because DSPS hasn't responded in weeks.
The keeping of the people as the militia, well disciplined and organized, and hopefully trained... I can see safe and reasonable ** zoning restrictions ** such as not having a commercial outdoor range built within 1,760 yards adjacent an EXISTING public building property line, or vise versa a public building cannot be built within 1,760 yards of an EXISTING commercial outdoor range property line... but I cannot see a blanket "NO" without existing reasonable zoning requirements ALREADY in place...
Part of the problem is the land is currently zoned residential/agricultural, not commercial. To your other point with over 300 acres there is more than enough room to keep it far away from the property lines, let alone other buildings.
Tom Grieve, your an attorney for gun rights and i have a question for the US as a whole. Where is the legislation that immediately deprives non felon spouse or other residents in the home of a felon? There are none. As the spouce of a felon, I'm looking for a team of attorneys that will take up a lawsuit against the US government and the ATF for repression and deprivation of Rights and protections under the constitution for people who live with FELONS who are now themselves deprived of their own 2A rights and protections without representation or legal counsel or due process by the State and Federal government. Under the current government 'LAWS' unconstitutionally applied to citizens of the United States, this would be the same as revoking drivers license for spouces of those with revoked or suspended drivers licenses. Sounds like a lot of unconstitutional overreach that is designed to seperate spouces and non felon residents and children that live with felons. People need to wake up
I think of a certain Mr. H, in 1930s Germany. He used speech with great effectiveness to essentially produce a nation of murderers. Thus the 1A and the 2A have similar effects: The freedoms they protect can be used to the good, and to the bad. They both allow for opportunities for training -- and the training can be used to increase the effectiveness of the good to do good, and the bad to do bad, in both the use of guns and the use of speech. Should we ban writing and speech classes now?
Germany was not a "nation of murderers". The Nazis were the murderers. The entire country of Germany were not exclusively Nazis. In fact I believe the German civilians were as much victims in the war as anyone else.
What analysis path was taken by the court? What was the how and why of offered historical regulations? Are the offered laws relevantly similar? - distinctly similar? outliers? or plentious? Inquiring minds. Failure to follow the proper analysis can constitute interest balancing.
The court made the right decision. The second amendment does not say you can build anything you want anywhere you want. This is not the only place to train in the area. People have a right to express their preferences through their representatives of what they want built and zoned for in a particular area.
Not only is long range necessary to combat tyranny, it is also a SPORT, so are they going to do the same thing if they decided to open a gym for say, gymnastics training, basketball training schools, football, etc etc?!?!
Not only is there a practical use for this kind of training there’s actually extensive competitions involving extreme long range shooting and I believe the current world record is 4.5 miles done in Idaho a couple years back if I remember correctly but that was simply some guys working with some manufacturers to see how far out they actually could push it and the riser block on that rifle was ridiculous, the scope was something crazy like 14 inches over the bore axis. Also anyone in the Michigan area who is looking for a long distance range, it’s a drive but it’s worth it, a place in Ohio called Thunder Valley Precision which has steel at various ranges out to 1 mile and then they have a 1000 yard benchrest range as well
So, they wish to ignore that the Framers had just fought, and won, a war against tyranny, with even the Continental Army primarily using personally owned weapons.
Using this logic, or lack there of, can again the same reason be used to say that a gun shop is not necessary as you can by a firearm at some other shop?
Instead of crime and liberty I’d call it crime and tyranny
“ A well-regulated militia,” means a well-trained and equipped people.
Means good working order, but in this case, that's pretty much the same thing.
and not controlled by the government
@@tgs9740 hence, “people.” For the left, the people are the individual citizens-make that persons-EVERYWHERE in the Constitution, EXCEPT in the 2A. Amazable!
Not surprised they are part of the government 😳
U.S.M.C. MARINE VETERAN: (America is upside down!)
50 YEARS AGO, I received my DUI 3rd victimless offense after serving (6) years as a young Marine during the Iranian crisis in (1979) returning to civilian life was difficult!
Ironically, all three victimless offenses occurred that same year I was “honorably discharged” (1979)
The victimless DUIs took place before meeting my wife, having children, and now grandchildren. (Age 25 at the time, today I'm 67)
DUI offenses that are victimless without incident, accident, or damaged party should never be an eternal lifetime 2-A 100+ year ban!
Title 18 922(g)(1) Requires Review because, the only damaged party was an "Honorably Discharged United States Marine"!
- USMC (Semper Fidelis) SGT E-5 (5811) TRUMP/VANCE FOR PRESIDENT ...
Under what authority do state governments even have, to remove your right to own, possess, and carry an arm unless you apply for a pay a tax to do so?
The 'Authority' every Dictator, Tyrant, and Traitorous Govt./Judiciary/Law ENFARCEMENT seizes and wields against the Peasantry, of course.
Their only authority comes from your willingness to submit, and the willingness of ANTI-American Traitors to celebrate them for tyrannizing you on their Collective behalf.
Only God can pull our Plugs at will. Mankind has to employ Violence of Action to enforce THEIR will against us; be that will singular, or Collective.
Ain't Democracy Grand?b
Vengeful Hypocrites make all manner of Evil possible in a Popular Democracy.
"Know your Enemy!" -- Zach de la Rocha
Remember always, Truth is Light and VERMIN are very afraid of operating in the Light.
Judge a Tree by its Fruits and NOT by the socially engineered and moronically popularized peer-pressures to ignore the same.
They tell you that you should only have a firearm if you have training. Then they tell you your training is the reason you’re being investigated, prosecuted, and convicted when you need to use your firearm in self defense. We need to stand firm on the wording of the second amendment. But also, vote with your wallet, people. That’s how you get businesses to change their mind.
But in this case it's a government not a business that is infringing. Vote with your feet.
@@loffy742 Agreed 💯. My post encompassed both groups.
The problem isn't how I'm voting it's how the clueless Democrats vote
@@loffy742yes it is the government.. but who holds the most influence? Businesses do because they just keep throwing money at it until they get their way.
That doesn't work on governments.
This is the problem we get from having a weak SCOTUS, who refuses to do their job and make things 100% clear.
They are being cagey for a few reasons. A) the democrats have come right out and stated they will pack the court if they don't get their way. This will have a nullifying effect on a lot of decisions and they have to put decisions into rather obtuse language. B) Chief Judge Roberts is trying to set up his legacy and does not want to have a bad reputation once he is gone therefore he tries to hit the middle without trampling the Constitution completely. I don't like it but I do understand what they are trying to do.
"Well regulated [Trained] militia [Not home defense]" Is EXPLICIT not implicit.
Just coming to the comments to say the same thing…. Spot on.
Ditto
And as an American male from the age of 18 the government must recognize you as a militia member. Selective service... And well it's a government agency so based on history and tradition we know government agencies like to retain all data even beyond the allowable times. What was it the ATF last used? "Well we have it but we don't look at it."...
The right to “keep and bear Arms” was included as a means to accomplish the objective of a “well regulated Militia”-to provide for the defense of the nation, to provide a well-trained and disciplined force to check federal tyranny, and to bring constitutional balance by distributing the power equally
“ A well-regulated militia,” means a well-trained and equipped people.
If we allow a municipality to override a constitutionally-protected right, then rights only exist as long as government allows it. In that case, we have no rights.
well thats already the case. why on earth have we not enacted the Declaration of independence is beyond me bc that's how we restore the rights to the people back from government. "Whenever the people are well informed, they can be trusted with their own government; that whenever things get so far wrong as to attract their notice, they may be relied on to set them to rights." “Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the citizenry.” “When a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government” “All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.”
― Thomas Jefferson
Politicians at all levels have been trampling on freedom of speech and property rights for years. We need a permanent defense against our basic rights.
A gun range near where I live was shut down for "environmental and noise pollution". This occurred in NorCal.
Mind you there was no actual pollution, just the premise there "could be" pollution by the lead from bullets. And the noise? They claimed it disturbed the non-existent people living nearby whom the closest lived 4 miles away. The range was nestled in a valley with several hills blocking sound in every direction. You couldn't even hear the gun shots from the main road that went by the range. It was quite literally in the perfect spot for a range.
But the green wackadoodles decided they knew best. For the birds and the bees they decided!
I know in my heart that there are many, many freedom-loving Californians. What I don't know is why, year after year, they don't put minor differences aside and vote in state assemblymen/women who, while maybe not lining up point-for-point on EVERY issue, agree with them on more or most of their deeply-held positions re: freedom and individual liberty? Why do they keep sending 🤡college graduates to Sacramento to implement their Marxist agenda for the once great state of California? Why????? Instead of forming coalitions who agree on the major issues, it seems that every conservative in Cali only wants a candidate who EXACTLY matches his/her on EVERY pet issue. If they find even one divergence, they either vote for a sure loser or don't vote at all, which is the same as voting (D) and empowering them further. OR, they move to another state, where they think the grass will be greener and end up missing some of Cali's social welfare schemes to much that they work to pollute their new home with such drivel. Cali doesn't have to be abandoned to the whacky, lunatic left - it can be salvaged, but that's not going to happen until and unless those who take exception to the new Bolshevik's plans for the state band together the way that the (D)s do, knock off the infighting, and start fielding some candidates that can get California back on track before it goes off the edge of a busted trestle and into a deep, rocky canyon from which there can be no rescue. Just my opinion, and it's worth every penny that you paid for it.
Yet you STILL live in that COMMUNIST state?
I have to wonder if that sheriff is going to actually enforce it. The cops in norcal are generally pro 2a as they are among the more conservative Californians.
The Gun Control groups will be using the "lead is a poisonous chemical" as a means of shutting down ranges and banning the use of lead for bullets. NO LEAD NO BULLETS. Use copper they declare, use bismuth they say. Those metals are prohibitively expensive to launch down range to punch holes in targets.
Nooo not spenceville😩
When “Liberty” rears its head and roars they’ll piss their pants 😢
If only liberty could get the energy up to vote,lobby,register, protest.but I'm sure the roaring will be less effort.
Of course, training is protected! Right there in the phrase "well-regulated." How can we be well-regulated (well suited for the task of militias) if we can't train?
exactly. but they tend to not focus on that part of the amendment and just the part saying "the people to keep and bear Arms" and then argue that we barely have that right wail leaving out the part saying "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right," and also leaving out, "shall not be infringed." in other words they cherry pick.
I fail to understand how you could be legally prevented from a legal right on your own land. In a rural area.
Because the Collective [now] matters MORE than the Individual.
The Reconstruction reverted us back to an "energetic" Centralized Government, in order to undo the protections of the Antifederalist' "Bill of Rights" and to exalt Hamilton's originally failed proposals as Dominant and Enforceable.
The traitors won the first CW, but they'll lose the next.
The main point is the government isn't required to allow a commercial use on residential/agricultural zoned land. I don't think the 1000 yds played into it too much.
It seems that many towns and cities annex ( claim control) over land well away from the dense population areas.
People need to succeed from these towns, counties and ( as we're seeing in eastern Oregon) states to secure their freedoms.
@@scottwhitcher265 *secede
Good point
@@Franimus seems they just don't want people to be ready to be attacked by their own government. and its not commercial use if its you alone shooting in your back yard.
“……shall not be infringed.”
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the Right of The People shall not be infringed.
I think the liberty side of the coin is more important. If things continue the way they are, this will all come to a head during this generation.
I keep hearing how Bruen changed everything, yet here we are, still begging courts to let us have our right to guns.
remember in November.
Remember 1775.
Because the courts are deciding these kinds of cases not based on the 2A but are finding other legal reasons to justify their decisions.
Cause the SCOTUS has no powers. So called L.E. agencies will do what they want.
@@TimHall-y8sthey talk big but can't be bothered to vote
Tom, Thank you for the discussion, much appreciated my 2A friend. The legislators, city-state-federal, need a better understanding of the word infringement. Thank goodness the SCOTUS gets it. The existing “sensitive places” restrictions should be their next target. -Jim
The well regulated militia needs to be able to fire longer than confrontational range
The military used to train on the 1000 yards regularly....
You would thing the military could murder confused third worlders for Halliburton at 600
Well they don't want their civilians being better than their military.
I see nothing in the second amendment that would lead me to believe that the government has the right to infringe on my use of a gun including training at whatever distance I wish to.
What about the people who can not afford to own their own range?
"Three guys in a gravel pit" - Love that quote!
Send this up the chain of courts….
Great info, Another 5 Star Review.
Love the reference to the whitworth rifle.
The court said they could have their 1000yd range, just not as a business. They could allow friends and family to use it. So, what precludes them from opening a private fraternal club for "The League Of Friends" that offers daily, weekly, monthly, yearly or whatever membership levels for access to the club-house? Club members are all friends! Says so, right there in the club name!
you just defined a business
@@landenkeller8218But the club is not for the range. The club is for friendship. The range is free to use for friends and family.
@@JDHood any lawyer competent enough to become a lawyer will break through that
@@landenkeller8218 Sure. Ok.
And the "friends" could make a "donation" to help with range upkeep and maintenance...
Not in California. You can have them and you can bear them, but you have no right to purchase them.
If businesses are permitted to commercialize things that are not protected, they must allow the commercialization of things that are protected. You can publish anything you choose but you can't sell them? You can sell ice cream and sports equipment but not newspapers and magazines and movies on DVD and music on CD?
You are 100% correct, IMO, on the "liberty vs. crime" interpretation of 2A associated needs. I don't need to shoot at 1,000 yards if we're talking about preparing for hunting or even competitive shooting. And I understand it when you say the "other part" is, for some, uncomfortable to discuss. But so is the possibility of a government becoming one of tyranny. Makes me uncomfortable to think of, but makes defending against it an absolute necessity. Thanks for a great discussion, and God bless you!
Awesome quote by Marcus Aurelius , thanks for sharing Tom. Great minds think alike.
So, what meanings did the word "regulated" possess in 1791, specific to firearms or those using them in defense of the "security of a free state"? Within the lexicon of firearms-related terms, "regulated" meant, as it always has, that a firearm was "sighted in";' that the sights were properly adjusted so that its projectiles would hit the intended target where the user of the arm intended them to hit. In order for militia members to be effective, their arms necessarily would have to have been "well-regulated". It's a perfectly acceptable term to use for sights that are properly adjusted.
The operator of the firearm is just as important; and that means practice and training.
@@vayabroder729 Militia members in those days were farmers, tradesmen, average citizens, not professional soldiers. You can bet your bottom dollar that many, if not most, were hunters as well, that being the best means at the time of procuring protein for the family table. There were no CVS, Win Dixie, Food Giant, Albertsons, Safeway, etc. back then. Those guys knew their way around a Kentucky long rifle or a squirrel gun.
@@SCSlimBoiseID absolutely but they needed practice in military matters as well.
If you accept the 6th circuit’s opinion, their rationale would allow banning of gun dealers and sales. Additionally, 1000+ yards would be a “reasonable” range for many hunting scenarios.
You’re getting it right on, Tom.
Thanks Tom for another great video. Keep up the good work. Hope to see you again in class someday soon. Keep us posted when your next classes. Thanks. Have a great day.
Great analysis Tom.
What if they said that zoning laws didn't exist at the time of our founding?
I am for training! I am a registered nurse and have been so for over 40 years. I went to Nursing School, obtained a state license to practice, and take the required numbers of hours to keep current every two years and renew my license every two years! I also hold a concealed carry permit in two states with reciprocity allows my to legally in 43 states. I also do training and proficiency exams every two years and actual physical classroom plus proficiency tests every four years. I am all for training for every gun owner.
Something I wouldn't have thought about it of. Great video.
Thanks, Tom 👍
Make it a private club, membership only. I'm sure smart people can get around this.
You're right, but we shouldn't have "get around"...
If voting at the ballot box keeps NOT WORKING we'll have to use the Second Amendment for its original intended use.
Remember, judge's terms expire when they do.
Thank you for your content.
I had a self-defense incident at 3/4 of a mile .
This doesn't even LOOK like a 2A case. It seems more like a property use claim.
I have long arms, at 5ft the barrel is touching the target!!
You mentioned famed Hathcock, who were the other record holders?
Courts should understand that Liberty is why they are around.
I'd have to ask of the court: exactly what's the maximum distance acceptable for armed confrontation? 500 yds? 10 yds?
What an absurdly specious argument to try to restrict our 2A rights.
"infringement" has no boundaries!
Have to wonder if the town would have allowed the range if the property had already been zoned commercial.
Thanks for the update
If I am supposed to be ready for militia if I can’t train?
I’m just gonna put this out there for fun! Ammunition is covered under the second amendment. This is because without ammunition there is no explosive in a gun and a firearm is defined as any weapon that uses the force or an explosive. Without ammo, a gun is not a firearm, I don’t know why this hasn’t been used to challenge the ammo background check laws and taxes
Thanks for this information
Councillor Grieve, you got it right. 3-point landing there. 👍👍👍
Zoning laws in general need to have a constitutional review... There are plenty of cities that have outlawed retail businesses just because they have FFL licenses and are selling firearms. They're basically banning the sale of firearms in their community using zoning laws.
Tom, with great respect for- and appreciation of - your legal expertise and your small arms knowledge, I want to caution strongly that constraining any Second Amendment question only to criminal defense or to sustaining liberty is both: (a) wholly unintended by our Founders and (b) provides those who oppose the Second Amendment with concessions and constraints that are unwise and myopic.
Initially, one could ask aren’t firearms reasonably and lawfully used for hunting (sometimes at 1,000+ yard ranges), for plinking, for recreational target shooting, and for sporting contests (ranging from skeet and trap, to IDPA, to exceptionally long range “bullseye” rifle competitions)? The foregoing examples are not easily included in either “Liberty” or “Criminals” categories, yet they certainly are enduring, historical and entirely valid uses of firearms.
Furthermore, our Founders’ inclusion of the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights was intended to incorporate evolutionary changes to firearms, ammunition, sights, powder, and so forth. Any individuals who doubt this must then logically assess if Freedom of Expression applies only to the spoken word (obviously, no radios, televisions, cable connections, internet news apps, etc. existed in the Eighteenth Century) and if Freedom of the Press is limited to newspapers and pamphlets (once again, no podcasts, internet news channels, radio, television, cable, and so forth in the 1700’s). Therefore, if 2A critics suggest that the freedom to keep and bear arms is relevant only to “Liberty” and “Criminals,” then - by their precise logic - Freedom of the Press must exclude all non-print media and Freedom of Expression must be inapplicable to all non-spoken communications.
To summarize, PLEASE DON’T restrict our Second Amendment liberties to only two usage categories AND PLEASE DON’T allow our adversaries to circumscribe evolutionary advances to any of our fundamental liberties (e.g., Freedom of Expression and Freedom of the Press were fundamental to Murrow’s World War II radio journalism from London and to Cronkite’s reporting on the CBS TV’s Evening News).
Gun ranges and training minimizes accidents because you’re responsible for every round leaving barrel meaning your life depends on you keeping shots on target. Plus you have to get to know your guns in order to be comfortable with it and always be able to be safe and maintain and repair. One of the biggest things are getting to know your guns and being comfortable with it making gun ranges extremely important
Thanks Tom , as always, another great video !!! 💥💥🔫from Commy Ct.🇺🇸
When do we acknowledge that regulation by the government of our rights is in fact infringement?
I would agree with your liberty argument. This is based on the right (liberty) to train at any distance I want.
Yes, that is what was meant by regulated.
Curiousity here. Would not the city gain monetarily from the range through taxes and such? Seems like they don't want the extra money, or do they think they'll have to spend it on additional policing, etc.?
We need at least 500 yard ranges to sight in our hunting riffles and shotguns. How can we train if they limit ranges to 21 feet?
U.S. v. Miller- if the military has it than so can the citizens. The military has many 1000 yard gun ranges.
What about the "..well trained militia part of A2...?
Seems like 1,000 yd. should be part of training
Yes how do you draw a line on distance for training weather it’s a hand gun or rifle we train with both. Criminals are shooting from longer distances because people are training with their guns and trying to stay out of jail by missing the criminal and hitting an innocent person.
If commercial training facilities can be disallowed, how can people get competent training? Long range competency requires long range training facilities. The retired Civil War military officers who established the NRA wanted to facilitate public long range arms competency needed for future military (militia) service.
When are you going to cover the Everard-Grisham v. Olmos Park out of the 5th circuit case? The 5th circuit ruled that an individual may call 911, and without stating a crime or saying they are in fear, make the legal open carry of a firearm unlawful.
So skip the training aspect, just charge for range time.
It isn't up to the government to decide what is the appropriate range you train at.
Interesting history on record sniper hits.
They could be training for Camp Perry competition.
What did I miss? What exactly is the reason length matters (to the opposition) on an outdoor range?
Exactly. If it’s good to do as a person why the hell can’t you have people come and pay for training on an available range.
Great T-shirt opportunity, 3 guys and a Gavel Pit 😂
Wasn't there a sniper " Murphy" in Revolutionary War that shot a British General at about 300 yards mortally hitting him?
Liberty.
Unless you are infringing on the rights of another,
you are free to do what you want, when you want.
The government can't disallow an activity on a whim.
🇺🇸
If the government assertion in US vs Miller is that military arms are the only arms protected by the 2nd amendment for private use, then would military training not also be the regulations protected by the second amendment for private use?
I mean the second amendment doesnt just say Arms, it also says regulations(IE training and equipment/supplies related to arms)
Training is indicated in the opening words, "A well regulated" it the time of the founding meant well trained and prepared.
"You can already cook on your property. You have no right to open a restaurant". Is this the case I'm hearing?
Also, from the customers' perspective, you have the right to practice long range marksmanship, but only if you can buy your own several-hundred acre range. That is not a reasonable burden to put on the right. There must be an allowance for publicly accessable facilities.
Would they be able to do a club membership that allows club members range time? Or would that still have to be zoned commercial? Or would that depend on state law?
Random question in regards to CCW and Carry Permits for a security person in wisconsin. In SPS 34.01 it makes it sound like if you have a CCW you dont need to obtain a carry permit for private security persons. Is that true? I was refered to here to ask because DSPS hasn't responded in weeks.
The keeping of the people as the militia, well disciplined and organized, and hopefully trained... I can see safe and reasonable ** zoning restrictions ** such as not having a commercial outdoor range built within 1,760 yards adjacent an EXISTING public building property line, or vise versa a public building cannot be built within 1,760 yards of an EXISTING commercial outdoor range property line... but I cannot see a blanket "NO" without existing reasonable zoning requirements ALREADY in place...
Part of the problem is the land is currently zoned residential/agricultural, not commercial. To your other point with over 300 acres there is more than enough room to keep it far away from the property lines, let alone other buildings.
Would it be a violation of the Commerce Clause?
how about training for hunting big game in the mountains?
Tom Grieve, your an attorney for gun rights and i have a question for the US as a whole. Where is the legislation that immediately deprives non felon spouse or other residents in the home of a felon? There are none. As the spouce of a felon, I'm looking for a team of attorneys that will take up a lawsuit against the US government and the ATF for repression and deprivation of Rights and protections under the constitution for people who live with FELONS who are now themselves deprived of their own 2A rights and protections without representation or legal counsel or due process by the State and Federal government. Under the current government 'LAWS' unconstitutionally applied to citizens of the United States, this would be the same as revoking drivers license for spouces of those with revoked or suspended drivers licenses. Sounds like a lot of unconstitutional overreach that is designed to seperate spouces and non felon residents and children that live with felons. People need to wake up
I think of a certain Mr. H, in 1930s Germany. He used speech with great effectiveness to essentially produce a nation of murderers. Thus the 1A and the 2A have similar effects: The freedoms they protect can be used to the good, and to the bad. They both allow for opportunities for training -- and the training can be used to increase the effectiveness of the good to do good, and the bad to do bad, in both the use of guns and the use of speech. Should we ban writing and speech classes now?
Germany was not a "nation of murderers". The Nazis were the murderers. The entire country of Germany were not exclusively Nazis. In fact I believe the German civilians were as much victims in the war as anyone else.
@@ecobasetech4558 LOL. The Nazis were the murderers...and a very LARGE proportion of Germans were Nazis.
Governors and mayors not upholding Supreme Court rulings is proving nobody is safe
Can you please cover Rahimi case and how they're weaponizing it for red flag laws?
Over reach , prime example
Murdock VS PENNSYLVANIA
What analysis path was taken by the court?
What was the how and why of offered historical regulations?
Are the offered laws relevantly similar? - distinctly similar?
outliers? or plentious?
Inquiring minds.
Failure to follow the proper analysis can constitute interest balancing.
So according to the court no one goes hunting?
The court made the right decision. The second amendment does not say you can build anything you want anywhere you want. This is not the only place to train in the area. People have a right to express their preferences through their representatives of what they want built and zoned for in a particular area.
Not only is long range necessary to combat tyranny, it is also a SPORT, so are they going to do the same thing if they decided to open a gym for say, gymnastics training, basketball training schools, football, etc etc?!?!
...SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.
Not only is there a practical use for this kind of training there’s actually extensive competitions involving extreme long range shooting and I believe the current world record is 4.5 miles done in Idaho a couple years back if I remember correctly but that was simply some guys working with some manufacturers to see how far out they actually could push it and the riser block on that rifle was ridiculous, the scope was something crazy like 14 inches over the bore axis.
Also anyone in the Michigan area who is looking for a long distance range, it’s a drive but it’s worth it, a place in Ohio called Thunder Valley Precision which has steel at various ranges out to 1 mile and then they have a 1000 yard benchrest range as well
The ignorance is crazy, we train to protect ourselves and for our country
The owners should create a PMA (private members association) They can just have a yearly membership, or monthly.
I guess we can change our state motto here in Michigan to; It's good enough.
So, they wish to ignore that the Framers had just fought, and won, a war against tyranny, with even the Continental Army primarily using personally owned weapons.
I would say that it’s a that slippery slope that is disfavor able to the 2 Amendment that the court is stepping down.
Using this logic, or lack there of, can again the same reason be used to say that a gun shop is not necessary as you can by a firearm at some other shop?
Marine Sniper is a great book about Carlos Hathcock.
Highly reccomend it.
The current record... that we know of.