Supreme Court 8-1 Denial Order Sparks Fast-Tracked Review of "Assault Weapon" & Magazine Bans!
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 24 сен 2024
- In this video I break down important developments in rifle and mag ban cases moving forward towards Supreme Court review!
🎥 Follow Me On Other Social Media 🎥
Instagram: / armedscholaryt
Twitter: / armedscholaryt
Twitch: / armedscholar
📷 My RUclips Setup 📷
Camera: (Sony A7siii) amzn.to/36YIe96
Lens: (Tamron 17-28) amzn.to/3wSPn5H
Lighting: (GVM RGB) amzn.to/3zpDfdT
Microphone: (Rode Wireless) amzn.to/3iBgnkU
Camera Stand: (Broadcast Boom) amzn.to/2V7meWV
Legal Disclaimer: This content is not intended to provide any legal guidance or advice. Although I am a licensed attorney I am not providing any legal advice through this video. If you have any legal questions please contact a licensed professional in your area to address your specific issues.
DISCLAIMER: This video and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. This helps support my channel and allows us to continue making awesome videos like this. Thank you for the support!
Support the channel by subscribing and liking the video!
Did sub long ago. Still thumb up your vids.
@@ArmedScholar I am subscribed doing all I can to help, keep up the good work
I have subbed to all the channels that interest me and turned off my history so I don't get flooded with what they think I want. I have to hit subscriptions on the search options but I only get who I am subbed to. It's crazy to me that 60% are not subbed.
Westchester County NY is having a meeting on 9/30/24 to increase pistol/ semi automatic licenses from $10 to $175… $1,650% increase!!!
@@mattingegneri1077 and the SCOTUS is reputedly going to ban any need for a carry conceal permit. So NYS will be in direct violation of the constitution.
This is the danger with playing the "assault weapons" game. 2a was written explicitly to protect weapons of war. All guns are weapons of war and assault weapons. Our rights shouldn't become subject to semantics.
There is NO SUCH THING as an 'assault weapon'! While an 'assault rifle' is a real device, and is the technical definition of a rifle capable of fully automatic fire, either natively or through a selector switch, an 'assault weapon' is a made up termininology which encompasses virtually ALL magazine-fed semi-auto rifles. Do not fall for this trap. It is an attempt to redefine nearly all semi-auto rifles and make them illegal. Stop people from using this false terminology.
🎯💯
The term "in common use" kills 2A by the judges.
See this is what I was thinking. Isn't the whole purpose of the second amendment so that we the people have the ability to fight off our government if need be? Why is this not being taught to our children be in schools or the home?
@@Iseedeadpeopleize censorship is becoming a serious issue
If the (so called) weapons of war are sooo horrific the police departments of this country should not be allowed to use them against its citizens. It would be interesting to see how the police would react to be disarmed.
I qaurranty I train with my firearms more than some officers do!!
While your at is disarm military of weapons of mass destruction only pistols fair is fair
@@mmk9kane36 who about rain .
Thats a great point.
When the constitution was written the military and civilians carried the same type of weapon. Why should we be different now from back then
Because “they” have BIG PLANS for us.
2A tells us we need to have the same weapons and know how to use them. The whole idea of 2A is so we can be armed exactly the same as the military and to be able form militias to defeat them.
They are also trying to ban civilian militias which is why the 2nd amendment exists
Because no one is actually willing to invoke the 2nd, call it fed posting all you want, but until the citizens are willing to use their rights governments will do what they can to prevent you.
@@AppalachianMemeticsYeah, the same big things like China, N. Korea, and other pro commie govt run countries.
There is NO military exception in the constitution so this can not be used to ban weapons.
This “militaristic type firearms” argument is absolutely ridiculous. The Supreme Court needs to quit diddling around and define that these ARE NOT military firearms, and actually the second amendment makes no mention of any such thing, in FACT history shows that the whole purpose of the second amendment was to protect the people's rights TO KEEP AND BEAR the same weapons as the military!
Just as the 1st amendment with free speech has no limits (yes, you actually can yell "fire" in a crowded building), neither does the 2nd.
Phrase "in common use" infringes on 2A. Sly foxes dressed as the good guys deciding what is constitutional.
@@kingwilly8041 Legal IF there is a fire, there is SCOTUS findings you cannot FALSELY cry 'fire' in a crowded theatre. I do agree that there is no such restriction on the 2A, and the ONLY weapon that can be denied as 'dangerous and unusual' would be nuclear weapons.
@@mcpig3240 wrong.
Doesn’t matter if they are, they’re protected arms regardless according to 2A which means GCA/NFA are also unconstitutional prima facie
Using a military review should backfire because what it will do is prove historically, we have been allowed to have military weapons since our founding and not allowing them is a modern-day infringement.
US V Miller from 1935 said it only protected military used weapons and used that as justification to outlaw short barrel shotguns.
@joenunya8449 +1 you get it
It shouldn't be about being pro 2A as a judge. It SHOULD be about the Constitution and rule of law.
AGAIN??? HOW MANY TIMES DO WE HAVE TO SAY NO, 2A SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED???
Till we actually get pro American people in office
@@absolutelyfookinnobody2843 it all about feelings feelings don't trump the rights of the people they love they paycheck but don't represent the people
History and tradition would tell you that gun laws have been a thing since the beginning.
@@absolutelyfookinnobody2843 Duel citizenship in DC. Two Allegiances. We are not a Jewish nation. When people realize that God is in control we will all be better off. We allow the mockingbird med.ia, data collection centers, the fed reserve, weaponized police departments and agencies, taxation w/o representation.
Time to get the NFA stricken down all together and get that in front of Thomas immediately.
Doesn't Thomas use the phrase " in common use" regarding his opinions on >>>>
2A . That is effed up.
Either he gets outvoted ALL the time? Or he lies ALL the time.
Whaddya think?
Shall Not Be Infringed.
Yea the Idiots can’t really understand what that means
When is the Supreme Court going to put on their big boy pants
Illinois needs to stop infringing on our rights
would be nice but unlikely i moved to ekntucky 2 years ago i was shocked when i asked what i needed to own guns and they said nothing need an id to buy guns ata a dealer if you ccan pass the nics check to buy you can carry most places here
mot just Illinous.
Plus California. The 9th circus is tyrannical
Wow. Deep. Didn’t realize it was so simple. Maybe should call and let them know. 😂
That's a prerequisite for being a demonRat.
Justice delayed is justice denied !!!
LOL.
@rona4960 what's so funny? It's actually true.
This absolutely a true statement. While the courts are busy jerking around the people of Illinois are left defenseless. The Supreme Court of the US should get on with it and make the constitutional ruling.
Are we a free country when we constantly have to defend our rights from our own government?
If anything, this ban would include all pistols and NO AR15s.
The military might use any pistol, but would never use an AR15.
It would ban all shotguns, handguns and bolt action if they go off military weapons, the AR15 has never been used by the military.
Shhhhhh!
Don’t give them any ideas!
A US Military Issue AR-15 ?... 🇺🇲 🤣🤣🤣
@@WazBourne2ShootIt was used originally as a survival rifle. Chambered 7.62 round. Carried in an airplane, probably like Bird Dog duties.
The Colt SAA .45 was originally a military weapon. As a matter of fact, the barrel to this day says " Colt Single Action Army."
Ty for what you do mr miranda
Thanks for watching!
NYS has a ban on characteristics: no threaded barrel, no bayonet lug, no folding stock, no pistol grip, and no detachable magazine. Has any one brought suit about these restrictions?
Don't really care about ny
Yea there are 2 but they are stuck in court.
CT has a ban on knives longer than a certain length. Banners gonna ban.
@@montelinn5897New York State is an important part of the USA. Like every other state in the Union.
@@1kraniMost states have a blade length limit of 3 inches .
Illinois resident here for the long fight us southern Illinois suffering for upper state BS
I completely agree! I grew up in rural Jackson county. Laws passed in this state that are more for Chicago or even east St. Louis screw us over!
I live in the Northern part and we have nothing to do with this. Blame the big cities, not the whole upper state.
Then lower state Illinois needs to start having babies and making money.
@@robertschemonia5617 The needs of the many, outweigh needs of the fewer or the one.
Not upper state, just a few bad apple counties. Please don't lump us all in with Lake, Cook, and DuPage.
So, uh...the military uses lots of bolt-action rifles, too -- and shotguns. Are they to be banned? Oh, yeah, and pistols, too.
Anything and everything will be banned as long as it's your freedom to have except elites
I don't want any fire arm banned. I want the laws that were written, meant to keep insane people from obtaining them, to be enforced. That will take care of the crimes. However, if someone wants to commit murder, they'll find a way. And when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.
Think about it. Clean up the drug problems and 75 percent of crimes will end, or be less violent.
Now, we all know that Cain slew Able with a piece of tree limb, right? Ok! We gotta ban any tree with limbs. What? It's the tree's fault for growing the limbs? Okay! Ban trees. What? It's not the tree's fault, rather the dirt that grew the tree? All right! We must ban the earth because it holds ALL of the dirt.
Makes absolutely no sense, huh? Right! Now, let's think about the ridiculous blame game called Gun Control.
See where it leads?
And hammers and shovels.
And short barrel shotguns and rifles.
And muffler devices...
Oh wait you mean weapons necessary to uphold a well regulated militia? Oh yea seems like a clown court to me
TELL THEM JUSTICE THOMAS!!!!
45th to “Like” and 4th to “Comment”. We the People are more informed because of you! Thank you
Thanks for stopping by like always!
So when those laws are found unconstitutional when do those politicians go to jail ? 18 U.S.C. 241
Thanks as always for your update.
A “militaristic” type weapon fits the bill perfect to protect from enemies foreign and domestic. Why is this even a thing in the courts??????
Hello Counselor,
Thank you for your valuable hardwork and research of the subject.
We appreciate the citations and facts of the case presented.
We wish you success and the best of everything.
More power to the Channel.
Long it may wave...
GOD Bless the USA.
Kind regards here in Corona Del Mar, CA.
Much appreciated!
Thank you for covering this case, being forn and raised in the communist oblast of illinois, I'm really tired of the state governments treating the 2nd amendment like the redheaded step child of the bill of rights, especially with what the pandemic and riots of 2020 taught us of how reliable the government is when shit hits the fan
They can have the mags if they prove they werent at a Diddy party 😅
AR-15 is not used for military
Actually, the military owns AR15 (along with the military variants), bolt action rifles, and handguns. At the ratifying of the constitution, some citizens owned more advanced weapons than the army. This begs the question, what difference does it make, the second amendment does not distinguish between civilian and military weapons.
@@georgelob3860 Anyone who says the military uses Ar-15 has never served. Initially is was designed for military, but it never happened... The Military does not use a rifle that is only semi-automatic.
@@georgelob3860 or fire rate, or cartridge, or device type, or barrel length, or level of danger....
I tend to agree that surrendering that argument however logically faulty is not the best way to argue against it.
Stating clearly that the Constitution intended ANY weapon to be allowed to be owned by ALL Citizens with no restrictions, specifically to keep well intentioned fools from chipping away at the right until it is gone.
Without equal weapons what would be the point of the right?
The fact that these weapons can be used for military purposes is the very reason they are included in the weapons protected by our 2nd Amendment. Remember the reason for our 2nd amendment is to enable the people to defend themselves against a tyrannical government and common sense dictates that in order to do so the people must have the freedom to arm themselves with weapons equal to those that any tyrannical government might arm their military with and that would obviously include arms that could be used for military purposes. 🤔
Amen! Well spoken. 100% correct.
@@jacoblecoy3700 Thanks. I see you understand why our 2nd Amendment was included in our bill of rights.
Algo I appreciate what you do, researching breaking down and reporting to us . I thank you
The Supreme Court must take an "assault weapons" ban and define the complete language of the 2 Amendment specifically "shall not be infringed"! We must not comply any longer with these unconstitutional infringements! Stay safe and 2A everyday my fellow patriots! God bless y'all!!
I just don’t understand why all the BS of bouncing it back from lower courts to upper courts to Supreme Court, then bouncing it back to the lower courts again I don’t get it once a court makes a decision. It should go to the next court higher once they make a decision go to the next court higher and then make your way to the Supreme Court. I don’t understand why they keep bouncing it back-and-forth. It’s like fucking ping-pong.
Amendment II
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
A well regulated militia
@@rona4960The National Guard is NOT the Militia. The NG is controlled by the Military.
Who would the Guard obey? That was proved when half of them were more than willing to turn on civilians.
The Militia is made up of Civilians fighting to protect their homes.
Weapons? Whatever they can get to do so.
@@rona4960 It means well trained. We are the militia.
@@AdamosDad Yes we are. We most definitely were when 2A was written
@@rona4960”necessary to the security of a free state” are you one of those people that believes we should need permission from a tyrannical government in order to form a militia to fight the tyranny?
What's hilarious is time and time again civilians owned firearms that we equal if not superior to the military.
1789-1854: While the Army used a large amount of smoothbore muskets many civilians commonly owned much more superior rifles.
1865-1892: Most of the Army used Trapdoor rifles, but Repeaters like the Winchesters became popular among civilians.
1892-1968: Civilians could walk into a gunshop and buy a military bolt action rifle, Semi-auto rifles, Thompsons, BARs, or even bring back home and own MP-40s, STG-44s, Type-100s, Browning MGs, and more.
WHY DOES IT MATTER..RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS IS ANY FIREARM....THESE PEOPLE ARE SO PETTY!!
They are trying to steal our rights and are using political doublespeak to do it.
They should stop playing games and rule on it at the SCOTUS level period. And what is a Military? Lawyers seem to play games in all this for profit.
The Courts, the legislators, the admin ALL need lessons on the MEANING AND RIGHTS outlined in the CONSTITUTION. These are every CITIZENS natural and inherant RIGHTS and NOT to be disrupted or stolen by ANY govt.
I hope it sets a precedent for Washington State to stop their infringement too
Always appreciate the updates, keep up the good work!
Thank you!!!
Thanks for another informative video!
Not giving one inch😊
I was Law Enforcement in Illinois yrs. ago,... I understand Totally the Gravity of this,...
How can military weapons be banned when, at the time of our founding, military and civilian weapons were one in the same?
@ArmedScholar Scotus said only weapons in use by the military were protected in us v Miller. It's already precedent. Otherwise that was a useless case upholding the nfa.
Thanks for bringing that to us
Appreciate the information breakdown as usual. 👍
Thanks for the update homie!
Thanks for the update
The MERRY-Go-Round keeps turning and this really does not mean much! It will be DECADES FOR THE SUPREME COURT TO RULE IN FAVOR OF THE 2nd Amendment.
Historically speaking, the weapons used in the Revolution were the only ones available - so it’s impossible to think, let alone believe, the weapons that were used weren’t military-grade of that time. Some of these judges are making a stretch, and making the Supreme Court work major overtime 😑
Almost a million come on people 🎉❤
🇺🇸👍
Screw “utility!” The utility is that I can own one. For whatever legal reason I desire.
The entire objective for the 2nd amendment was to stand up to tyrannical government, who would all have military style firearms, the citizens must have equal weaponry.
I thank you for giving so much background information.
Great review of the latest court findings
Anthony Thank you. Ever you need HVACR advice please let me know. Knowledge transfer is king.
Greatly appreciate your information
If the "military use" criteria is allowed to stand then would that not also allow bans on single shot breach loaders?
Demons have no morals or conscience all they know and believe is what the great deceiver lets them know and believe.
mmmmkay
Explain that please?
You do a great job with these videos but I had to stop watching.
The constant back and forth and false advancements and corruption on these issues is way too annoying.
Constant frustration.
I only catch one every. Couple weeks now.
Another great video!!!
Glad you enjoyed it!
How can the US justify banning guns in US v Miller on the premise that a saws off shotgun was “not” a weapon that protected by the second amendment because it didn’t meet the small arms in common use. Then try to ban an AR-15 even though it is a small are in common use. The Government cannot have it both ways in a legitimate court of law.
Agreed.
Miller should be overturned anyway. It was a pathetic and inaccurate justification to uphold the NFA.
Short barrel shotguns were in common use both by civilians and the military used in trench warfare.
Any weapon can not be banned.
There. Fixed it.
No they ruled the short barreled shotgun was not in military use , so it was not a militia weapon thus able to ban.
Thanks Anthony
Thank you
What is a Weapon of War? True weapons of war are Aircraft Carrier, Destroyers, Cruisers, Guided-Missile and Attack Submarines, Bombers, Fighter Jets, Tanks, Self-Propelled and Towed Artillery and there are many more examples of weapons of war. But Small arms such as pistols and rifles that have civilian crossover, such as self-defense, hunting and shooting sports, even though used in war, should not be labeled as weapons of war. No matter how scary they look to Anti-Gun Activists.
Thank you for this 2A update.
“. . . SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.”! What’s so hard to understand about that?!
thanks for updates
Thank you. God bless you
The SCOTUS can't rule on this fast enough!
I just started watching your videos. They’re great. Thanks
Great Report. Thank You. AS
Justice Thomas for President 2028.
God bless America.
🇺🇸🇺🇸
Sitting 15miles from St. Stephen's courtroom, I for one, am DONE waiting on these higher courts to dig their heads out of their elite asses, and make the OBVIOUS rulings that ANY 12yr old would come too.. WTF part of SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED is so fucking difficult? Time to IMPLEMENT the 2A in the manner in which it was intended.. Tim is a HERO.... SST..
Thanks
We shall not be infringed!
There is no American military that uses the AR-15! WTF?
The AR15 was originally a Survival rifle. Used by pilots. Fired a 7.62.
When the Military got interested it became the AR 16. Then, the firing mechinizm had an iron Allen Screw instead of a stainless. When it was corrected it became the AR 16 E1.
That was in the mid 60s. I was stationed in West Berlin, Germany at the time. We saw a demonstration. When I was transferred to Vietnam the E1 was being issued to some units.
@@jacoblecoy3700
There is literally NOTHING right in your post.
The rifle was originally the AR-10 in 7.62.
Armalite/Fairchild also developed and scaled down the rifle design in .556…
Designated the Armalite (AR)15.
The designs were sold to Colt in the early 60’s
Colt redesignated the rifle the Colt 601 and proceeded to develop the weapon for military service.
Once adopted by the military its military designation became M16.
With subsequent variants being A1-4.
Let’s get this done
thanks
Most of the cannons used in the revolutionary war were privately owned. The population in the 13 colonies were as well armed as any standing army in Europe at that time. Lest we forget.
thank you
The very first gun ever created was for military use! That’s what they were originally made for? Squirrel hunting came much later!
Hello, algorithm. I like this 2A news.:)
Really getting tired of this BS. Why can't they leave us legally responsible America patriots alone.
Thanks you the info
❤❤❤ thank you for the update.
Why aren’t these lawsuits in Massachusetts being brought to a conclusion that everything they try to pass is unconstitutional?
Where in the 2nd or anywhere else are we prohibited from owning any firearm? Their are none
Thank you for this!
During US vs Miller 1939, the Army stated sawed off shotguns had no militia use but militia weapons are constitutional. This is what swayed the Court then.
When is the next update/hearing on WA magazine and “assault” weapons ban?
Citizens should be allowed the same guns that any law force has. State, county, city, FBI, or ATF, they are not deployed
The Military Use Test allows them to ban just about everything because nearly all of the best firearm designs have been used by the military.
Massive non-compliance.
To ban a firearm because of its aesthetics is foolish at best.
Delaying tactics are dishonest attempts to circumvent the rulings of the Supreme Court, eventually I believe that the Supreme Court Will step in and do whatever is right and correct. As a Law abiding citizen I will obey whatever the final decision is -that weather I agree or not.
Hello Al
🇺🇸👍
Another case gets overturned first by the Supreme Court, what does that mean for Illinois ?