At What point do we say ENOUGH!
By
Downtownv, in General Discussion
-
Recently Browsing 0 members
No registered users viewing this page.
-
Supporting Vendors
-
-
Latest Topics
-
-
Posts
-
By xXxplosive · Posted
In a ruling that had both proponents and opponents of the Second Amendment do a curious double take, a federal judge has ruled that an illegal immigrant was wrongly banned from possessing firearms. U.S. District Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman ruled on March 8 that the defendant, Heriberto Carbajal-Flores, who is residing in the United States illegally, had his Second Amendment right’s violated when prosecutors originally charged him with 18 U.S.C § 922, which bars illegal immigrants from carrying guns or ammunition. “The noncitizen possession statute, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5), violates the Second Amendment as applied to Carbajal-Flores,” Judge Coleman wrote in her ruling. “Thus, the court grants Carbajal-Flores’ motion to dismiss.” The defense team for Mr. Carbajal-Flores had argued in their recent motion that the government could not show the law referenced was “part of the historical tradition that delimits the outer bounds of the right to keep and bear arms.” In 2022, the Supreme Court ruled that the government must show that each regulation “is consistent with this nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.” The precise wording of the high court’s decision was enough for the defense to argue successfully in favor of dismissal. “Lifetime disarmament of an individual based on alienage or nationality alone does not have roots in the history and tradition of the United States,” Mr. Carbajal-Flores’ lawyers said. “The government argues that Carbajal-Flores is a noncitizen who is unlawfully present in this country. The court notes, however, that Carbajal-Flores has never been convicted of a felony, a violent crime, or a crime involving the use of a weapon. Even in the present case, Carbajal-Flores contends that he received and used the handgun solely for self-protection and protection of property during a time of documented civil unrest in the Spring of 2020,” Judge Coleman wrote. The ruling has promoted a large range of reactions across the legal and Second Amendment community. Writing on The Reload, attorney Matthew Larosiere agreed with the decision saying that even those in the country illegally are part of “the people” the Framer’s mention in the Second Amendment. “To find that illegal immigrants are outside of ‘the people’ protected by the Second Amendment, you must believe that the Framers were talking about a different ‘people’ in the First, Fourth, Ninth, and Tenth Amendments,” he wrote. What Say You..... -
They get by with a little help from their friends. Like five years of increase. Here are the Republicans that voted to raise New Jersey's gas tax (nj1015.com)
-
So... 1) The CNJFO didn't exist back then. IT is currently operated by people who were just as angered by the dysfunctional spate of 2a advocacy groups NJ has been saddled with since the 91 AWB. There existence seems to have ushered in cooperation and coordination at both the state level and with national entities. 2) The ANJRPC isn't the turd of an organization it used to be. It genuinely seemed to exist solely to waste everyone's time while the NRA mothership used us to drive fundraising elsewhere. It seems to have moved away from that. Currently I give to those two groups locally, and to FPC, GOA, and SAF nationally. Although I have to say that SAF is on the bubble. They do good work, but are way too comfortable chipping away slowly at things on a single front. Basically I set aside the price of a case of ammo each year. Around Christmas they each get $25. Then hand out the rest of the funds as I see things I want to back and or fight.
-
By Old Glock guy · Posted
Unless I'm reading things wrong, I believe we can carry almost anywhere. I think our glass is more than half full.
-
-