Category: Legal

Posted on

The Gun Owner’s Guide to Critical Court Cases

SUPREME_COURT_DC_GUN_LAWIt’s the absolute truth that most people who favor tighter gun laws are completely clueless when it comes to guns. When you hear statist politicians and people in the media talking about “assault ammunition,” when they describe an AR-15 as a “high-powered rifle” and can’t tell you what a “barrel shroud” is, they demonstrate their profound ignorance about a subject that matters very much to many Americans.

Many people, both those who support the Second Amendment and those who want to subvert it, are also highly uninformed when it comes to gun laws in the United States. Part of the reason is that, when it comes down to it, the Second Amendment is gun law in this country: “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.” This basic statement has been shaped and chipped away by laws passed on the local, state and federal level. The ability of various jurisdictions to put limits on Americans’ right to keep and bear arms has been guided by some very important case law—cases that should be familiar to all Americans who care about the right to self-protection.

If you know these cases, you can easily counter the arguments of those who want to disarm you. “The right to have a gun is not a civil right.” Wrong: Johnson v. Eisentrager, 1950. “The Second Amendment doesn’t mean you can have a military weapon.” Wrong: U.S. v. Miller, 1939, and D.C. v. Heller, 2008. “The police are supposed to protect us.” Wrong: Warren v. District of Columbia, 1981.

Supporters of the  right to keep and bear arms should be armed with the information needed to counter the ignorance of those who would take away their rights and make this a much more dangerous country. Learn the names and dates, study the cases, and be ready with the facts when you need them.

Please note: unlike our president, I am not a formal constitutional scholar. (I’m also not a smoker or a socialist.) But I’m a firm believer in the Constitution and the right to keep and bear arms, and I think I have my facts straight here. Please let me know in the comments if you think I got anything wrong (or missed any crucial points) in my summaries. Continue reading “The Gun Owner’s Guide to Critical Court Cases”

Posted on

The Surveillance Self-Defense Site

As an admitted geek, I have often tried to help people in understanding ssd-1the importance of information security, especially when it comes to data storage and transmission.  From what kind of software you run, to how you communicate with others your data can be vulnerable.  From employers to government agencies, neighbors to hackers, what you say and keep can be taken and used in ways that you don’t want.  But teaching everything people should know to keep themselves safe is often a long process, and something I often have to revisit to remind people. Continue reading “The Surveillance Self-Defense Site”

Posted on

Carrying a Concealed Pistol in Utah

Who has the legal obligation to protect you and your family?

Given the following:

In the 2005 Castle Rock v. Gonzales case, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that Jessica Gonzales did not have a constitutional right to police protection, even in the presence of a restraining order.

it would seem that YOU are the only one who can or should be depended on to defend you and yours in a dangerous situation. Law enforcement is often minutes away when a life or death situation is over and done with (for better or worse) within seconds.
Continue reading “Carrying a Concealed Pistol in Utah”

Posted on

The British called, they want their guns back.

Real world modern and historic data have shown that government efforts to suppress gun ownership negatively affects law abiding citizens while having little to no affect on criminals or the criminal use of firearms.  Citizens of England and Australia have come to that realization, perhaps too late.

Listening to these people talk about the incremental way that their rights were first infringed upon, then completely taken away reminds me of a famous quote by Martin Niemöller:

“First they came for the Communists, but I was not a Communist, so I said nothing. Then they came for the Social Democrats, but I was not a Social Democrat, so I did nothing. Then came the trade unionists, but I was not a trade unionist. And then they came for the Jews, but I was not a Jew, so I did little. Then when they came for me, there was no one left to stand up for me.”

As liberty loving Americans we need to stand up for not only our Rights but the Rights of others.

Posted on

Friend in need.

When I lived in Southern California, I began to get into long range target shooting. Through this hobby I met Tom Miller and Don Anderson, two of the nicest people you will ever meet. Tom is a retired ATF agent and FFL dealer. I bought my EDM Arms Windrunner through Tom as well as both of the Nightforce scopes that I own. His prices and most of all his friendly service are second to none.

Don was his right hand man, helping out at gun shows, but more than this, he was a regular at the monthly .50 cal shoot at Angeles Ranges. He allowed anyone interested to shoot his .50 cal, .408 CheyTac or .338 Lapua for free, just to promote interest in the sport. He invested in all the best equipment to reload .50 cal ammunition and would sell it to anyone at his cost to shoot in their own rifles. This of course represented a considerable amount of time he was giving away, just to help promote the sport.

Picture from ShootingTimes.com
Picture from ShootingTimes.com

About 2 years ago, a while after I left California, I found out that Don’s house had been raided by SWAT teams, the ATF and LA County Sheriffs. All his semi-automatic firearms were taken away. This was followed by two years of silence. Don had done nothing illegal and we all assumed that the DA and others were hoping they would be able to let it die without admitting they were wrong. Continue reading “Friend in need.”