FL: Federal District Judge Finds Ban on Guns in Post Offices to be Unconstitutional

On September 14, 2022, at a Tampa, Florida Postal facility, agents of the Postal Inspector attempted to arrest Emmanuel Ayala, a postal worker, for possessing a firearm on postal property, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 930(a). Ayala had a valid Florida Concealed Carry Permit. He often carried a 9mm pistol in a fanny pack, for self defense.

Ayala fled from postal inspector agents, so a resisting arrest charge was included. An indictment was filed more than a month later. A warrant was issued on October 27th, and Ayala was arrested on November 16, 2022.  Counsel was appointed and Ayala was released from custody on the same day, and discovery was ordered in the case.

Ayala filed a motion to dismiss the case, citing the Supreme Court Bruen decision on January 5, 2023. The Bruen decision restored Second Amendment rights which have been infringed for several decades.

On January 12, 2024, United States District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, filed the order dismissing the charge of possessing a firearm in a federal facility as violating Ayala's Second Amendment rights. From the order on courtlistener: The 18 U.S.C. § 930(a) charge is found to be unconstitutional

The United States indicted Emmanuel Ayala, a postal worker, for possessing a firearm in a Federal facility in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 930(a). Ayala argues that statute is unconstitutional as applied to him because the historical record does not support a law banning firearms in post offices. See N.Y. State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (2022). Relying on dicta from earlier cases, the United States responds that the Second Amendment allows it to punish the bearing of arms inside any government building. But the Supreme Court has been clear: the government must point to historical principles that would permit it to prohibit firearms possession in post offices. See id. at 17, 24. The United States fails to meet that burden. Thus, I dismiss the § 930(a) charge because it violates Ayala’s Second Amendment right to bear arms.

Judge Mizelle noted the Biden administration gave short shrift to historical analysis of the case. She was not required to do historical analysis.  Historical analysis to find support for a gun control law is the burden of the prosecution in Second Amendment cases. Judge Mizelle undertook extensive historical analysis for her opinion, as she could elect to do. Here is a summation of her findings from page 11 of the filed opinion;

Since the Post Office’s creation, mail carriers have faced the risk of violence. Passengers of nineteenth-century stagecoaches, which carried mail, “risked death or injury if coaches were attacked by robbers or Indians.” USPS, AN AMERICAN HISTORY at 5, 17. Recognizing this reality, Congresses in the first half of the nineteenth century appropriated money to reward individuals who helped apprehend postal robbers. See, e.g., An Act for the Relief of D.W. Haley, ch. 66, 25 Stat. 713 (1838). In the latter half of the nineteenth century, when locomotive became the dominant way to move mail, bandits threatened postal workers aboard trains. Colorado Train Robbers, N.Y.TIMES, 2 Sept. 1891, at 8. Yet the federal government never sought to ban firearms to protect employees or secure mail delivery. In fact, when mail train robberies became a growing threat in the early twentieth century, the Postmaster General armed railway mail clerks with “government-issued pistols” from World War I. USPS,AN AMERICAN HISTORY at 23, 107.

The ban on firearms in post offices is very recent. It was put in place in 1972. There is no historical precedent to indicate a ban on carrying weapons in post offices ever existed prior to 1972.  Judge Mizelle dismissed the notion the government could ban firearms because it owned the property. Judge Mizell stated there was no historical precedent for such an interpretation. If the government were given such power, it would be a backdoor ban on the right to bear arms.

Ayala still faces charges of resisting arrest. He has filed a motion claiming the resisting arrest charge is moot because the arrest was not valid if the law was unconstitutional.

Future court proceedings will decide the resisting arrest issue.

 

©2024 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

 

 

MI: Detroit Homeowner Shoots, Kills Intruder

DETROIT – A homeowner has shot and killed a man who broke into his house on Detroit’s west side.

The incident occurred on Monday (Jan. 15) at 2:40 p.m. in the 18600 block of Rutherford Street.

More Here

Fourth Circuit to hear Maryland Second Amendment case En Banc

Maryland State Flag

 

On January 11, 2024, the United State Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit agreed to re-hear the case of Maryland Shall Issue v Wes Moore

A three judge panel found the Maryland law infringed on Second Amendment rights to acquire handguns and was unconstitutional under the Supreme Court Bruen decision of 2022. The three judge panel filed the split decision on November 21, 2023.

This is a long running court case challenging numerous infringements required by the Maryland law. The case started in 2016. 

On December 5, 2023, the defendants (essentially the government of Maryland), filed for an en banc hearing of the case before the entire Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. The government of Maryland, in their petition for an en banc review, showcase an alarming misunderstanding of the Constitution and the Bruen Supreme Court decision. They claim the Bruen decision actively promoted the concept all "Shall Issue" laws are acceptable under the Second Amendment. This comes from a misreading of Judge Kavanaugh's concurrence. As such, it is only Judge Kavanaugh's opinion. From the Bruen decision, Justice Kavanaugh concurring:

I join the Court’s opinion, and I write separately to underscore two important points about the limits of the Court’s decision.

First, the Court’s decision does not prohibit States from imposing licensing requirements for carrying a handgun for self-defense. In particular, the Court’s decision does not affect the existing licensing regimes—known as “shall-issue” regimes—that are employed in 43 States.

Supreme Court decisions only apply to the issues raised in the case. The question of whether Shall Issue laws are constitutional was not raised, which is why the Bruen decision does not prohibit them, at this time.  More from the Kavanaugh concurrence:

Going forward, therefore, the 43 States that employ objective shall-issue licensing regimes for carrying handguns for self-defense may continue to do so. Likewise, the 6 States including New York potentially affected by today’s decision may continue to require licenses for carrying handguns for self-defense so long as those States employ objective licensing requirements like those used by the 43 shall-issue States.

The petition by the government of Maryland makes the claim the Kavanaugh concurrence is a direct endorsement of all "Shall Issue" laws. From the Petition for Hearing En Banc: 

And there is no indication that the Court’s shall-issue discussion was limited to public-carry, as opposed to permit-to-purchase, regimes. Indeed, such a conclusion would be directly contrary to the fundamental principle animating Bruen: that the right to keep and the right to bear are on equal footing. See Bruen, 142 S. Ct. at 2134, 2156 (noting that “[n]othing in the Second Amendment’s text draws a home/public distinction,” and that the right to public carry was “not a ‘second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees’”).

It is an interesting bit of wordsmithing, claiming an infringement on one half of the right to keep and bear arms, justifies the same infringement on the other half. You have to be able to acquire a handgun in order to carry one.  If restrictions are imposed both on acquiring and carrying, as the Maryland law does, the restrictions are additive, not parallel. The government petition claims the Maryland law meets the history test of Bruen, because if it did not, all "Shall Issue" laws would be at risk. Constitutional rights are not bounded by the possibility of upsetting existing law. 

There is no tradition or history of requiring permits, training and permission from a governmental authority in order to acquire handguns. All of those infringements came to the USA very late, as states worked hard to prevent disfavored minorities from acquiring handguns, after the slaves were freed.

The strategic thinking by those who hate limits on governmental power appears to be to delay, delay, delay. If the restoration of Second Amendment rights can be delayed long enough, who knows? Maybe the Democratic Party will be able to pack the Supreme Court with Progressive judges, as was pushed hard just three years ago. Maybe an originalist, textualist judge or two will die, so President Biden can change the court. Maybe someone will find CD's from Epstein's Island, with Justice Roberts on it. Perhaps the horse will learn to sing.

Hatred for the Second Amendment and any limitation on government power is in Progressive DNA.

©2024 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

 

 

 

OH: Gunfight at Attempted Gun Sale, two shot, two Arrested

Two men are in custody and one man is still hospitalized following a shooting Sunday night at a Madison Twp residence, according to the Butler County Sheriff’s Office.

The double shooting happened shortly before 7 p.m. in the 4800 block of Eck Road and apparently stemmed from the sale of a gun, according to Butler County Sheriff’s Capt. Rick Bucheit.

More Here

TN: Bimble Resident Shoots Man attempting Forcible Entry

At approximately 7:41 pm, Knox County 911 received a call of a shooting on Higgins Hollow Road in the Bimble community. Knox County Deputies responded to the scene along with Knox County EMS.

Detective Jesse Smith has determined that a male individual was attempting to gain forcible entry into a residence when he was shot by an occupant of the home.

More Here

Stay on California Carry Dissolved by three judge Panel in Ninth Circuit

 

On December 20, 2023, US District Judge Cormac J. Carney issued an order granting a preliminary injunction against the defendants (the State of California government). The injunction stopped the state from enforcing the blatantly unconstitutional SB-2 law declaring most of California as "sensitive places" where even licensed concealed carriers were forbidden to carry arms in public.

The state asked for an order to stop the injunction from going into effect on December 22, 2023. The stay was granted on December 30, 2023, by an administrative three judge panel of the Ninth Circuit. The stay was appealed to the Ninth Circuit three judge merits panel on January 3, 2024. From the appeal:

With the December 30, 2023, administrative stay of the District Court’s December 20, 2023 injunction, (Dkt. No. 17) the Second Amendment-protected right to carry a firearm outside of the home has been effectively destroyed in California for all people with concealed carry weapon permits (“CCW permits”). 1Plaintiffs-Appellees, as well as all other Californians with existing CCW permits, can no longer carry their handguns in any public place except some streets, sidewalks, and at the few private businesses that have posted signs affirmatively allowing carry on their private-premises. This extraordinary curtailment is the result of Senate Bill 2 (“SB 2”) taking effect this week.

SB 2 was enacted in response to the United States Supreme Court’s landmark ruling that recognized a “general right to publicly carry arms for self-defense.” New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n, Inc. v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1, 31 (2022). SB 2 thus represents California’s attempt to defy the U.S. Supreme Court and it not the district court’s preliminary injunction -- interrupts the status quo ante of “where” people with carry permits can exercise their right to armed self-defense. California’s defiance includes a plan to lure this Court’s into treating the Second Amendment as a disfavored right. But doing so would gut the right of self-defense and put peoples’ lives in danger. That is the urgency that attends the State’s motion for a stay. That is the reason this motion must be addressed in haste.

On  January 6, 2024, the emergency stay was dissolved by the three judge merits panel. Only two of the three judges on the merits panel were available. Both of them agreed to keep the injunction preventing the California law, SB-2, from going into effect. Both agreed to deny the stay pending appeal.

The administrative stay previously entered (Docket Entry No. 10 in 23-4354; Docket Entry No. 17 in 23-4356) is dissolved. The emergency motion under Circuit Rule 27-3 for a stay pending appeal and for an interim administrative stay (Docket Entry No. 4 in No. 23-4354; Docket Entry No. 4 in No. 23-4356) is denied pending further order of the court.

The three judge merits panel has restored the status quo to California concealed carry permit law to what it was before the unconstitutional SB-2 was passed.  The plaintiffs  reminded judges the ability of judges to carry in public places was put in jeopardy by SB-2. The Introduction started with these words:

Judges, prosecutors, victims of stalkers and domestic violence, and even people who are targets for robbery

Many judges in California have carry permits. SB-2 took away judges and prosecutors rights along with all others who have California carry permits. Judges and are not granted a special privilege to carry without a permit, as they are in some states. They can usually get permits easier than "common folk", but they are still required to obtain a permit.

©2023 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

 

 

 

 

TN: Man Breaks into Camper, attacks Residents, is Shot, Killed

More Here

NC: Fleeing Felon tries to hide in Home, Forced out at Gunpoint

Narcotics agents arrived in the 1000 block of James Street to execute a search warrant when Phillip Howard Fortune, 30, ran away from the front yard towards a wooded area behind the home.

Fortune continued running to Vance Street, where he broke into an occupied residence in an attempt to hide from agents, officials say. However, he soon fled that home as well after the homeowner confronted him with a gun, according to Sheriff Brian Estes.

Fortune continued to run and was captured by agents.

 

 

More Here

OK: Bartlesville Woman Shoots Strange man who Broke into her Apartment

Bartlesville Police say a woman shot and killed a man who broke into her apartment.

Police say the man was 23 years old and that the woman told police she didn’t know him.

Neighbors say the thing that surprised them the most is they didn't expect something like this to happen in broad daylight when families are getting ready for work and kids ready for school.

Bartlesville Police say a woman called 911 this morning and said someone was breaking into her apartment, then said she'd shot the intruder.

 

More Here

US a "Shining City on a Hill" with Second Amendment

The United States Constitution and the Second Amendment are shining examples of freedom and limitation on government power over much of the world.  The Second Amendment and the right to keep and bear arms are envied by millions of people in the rest of the world, very plausibly by hundreds of millions. They are particularly envied where the governments are known to be corrupt and common people are disrespected, intimidated, and lorded over. Cuba and Venezuela come to mind. An incident in Panama from 1989 is illuminating. 

In 1989, this correspondent was working for the U.S. Army. Through a series of fortuitous events, I was assigned one of the posh residences on Ancon Hill, near Gorgas Army Hospital. As the U.S. economic embargo against the Noriega regime tightened the economic screws, the poorest people were suffering. Ancon Hill is next to the border of the old Panama Canal Zone. A couple of beggars managed to make it up to the residences to ask for work and food. 

My policy was to require a little work and to give them a dollar or two and a couple of cans of food. One of them spoke pretty good English, and we were able to converse a bit about the state of affairs. He was an educated man, about 50, who was not happy with El Presidente Noriega. He opined the same situation could never happen in the United States.

"¿Por qué?" I asked, in my very bad Spanish.

"Because", He said, "In the United States everyone has guns. The Rifle Association will not let them take the guns." I was amazed. Here was a Panamanian man, a poor man, who knew more than many Americans about the purposes of the Second Amendment. We had a good conversation. I had him sweep a few feet of sidewalk, gave him a couple of dollars, a couple of cans of food, perhaps something from the refrigerator to drink, as I recall. It was over 34 years ago. I may have recounted this incident elsewhere. If there are minor variations, blame it on an imperfect memory.  I never saw him again. We were evacuated from Panama shortly after, and shortly after that, Panama was invaded by the United States. Much of the action happened a couple of miles from my former residence on Ancon Hill. 

Something similar has happened in correspondence with people in other countries, or talking with immigrants to the USA, and in news articles here and there.

In much of Brazil, there is a desire for more access to arms for self defense. It was one of the main policies of President Bolsonaro. In Argentina, President Milei has been elected with removing restrictions on the access to arms as one of his promised policies. In Nigeria, political candidates are calling to have more access to arms for self and community defense. 

From Punch: 

This is not the first instance where a political figure is championing for Nigeria’s right to bear arms.

The House of Representatives Majority Leader, Alhassan Ado-Doguwa, in 2022, said Nigerians must be allowed to take up arms and defend themselves against terrorists.

The then Governor of Benue State, Samuel Ortom, in 2020 also reiterated his appeal to the Federal Government to allow responsible Nigerians bear arms to defend themselves.

In the Czech Republic, the right to armed self defense has been included in their Constitution, although it is a weak shadow of the Second Amendment. 

Israel is making it a little easier for private people to bear arms for their own defense. Their laws are still some of the most restrictive in the world. 

There are those who think Americans are barbarians who are extremely stupid to allow their commoners to have free access to guns. Those same people are often happy to be shielded by American naval power and America's atomic arsenal.

None of the foreigners I talked to believed the Second Amendment did not apply to individuals, even those foreigners who denigrated the right.  All of them believed the USA was the most armed country in the world, because of the Second Amendment. The meaning of the Second Amendment was clear to them, even if they disagreed with it. 

©2023 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

 

 

 

PA: Wrestling Star Blk Jeez Survived Carjacking Attempt by Returning Fire

PHILADELPHIA - National Wrestling Alliance (NWA) star and cancer survivor Blk Jeez, legal name Darnell Kittrell, survived an attempted carjacking on Thurs., January 11, at approximately 7 p.m. in Philadelphia. Kittrell, who was in his vehicle, was approached by four masked men. In the course of the incident, one of the assailants shot Kittrell in the hip, resulting in a non-life-threatening injury.

Kittrell, who possesses a permit to carry a gun, used his legally registered firearm to defend himself and returned fire. The suspects fled the scene, and investigators are currently reviewing surveillance footage for leads. Kittrell was taken to a local hospital and is recovering. 

More Here

AR: Domestic Defense, Man Shot by Woman

Springdale Police Sgt. Matt Ray said the department got a call about a disturbance at 634 N. 40th Street around 12:30 a.m.

When officers arrived, they found one person had been shot. Police said Kevin Marquez-Argueta was shot in the face during an altercation with a woman. Police said when the woman's child tried to stop Marquez-Argueta from hitting the woman again, Marquez-Argueta pushed the child into a door. Police said the woman then shot Marquez-Argueta in the face.

Police said he was taken to a nearby hospital with non-life-threatening injuries.

More Here

WA: Tenino Self Defense shooting under Investigation in Thurston County

When law enforcement personnel arrived at the scene, “they confirmed there was a shooting, and one person was deceased,” according to the news release. 

Detectives responded to the scene and interviewed the shooter and witnesses, according to the news release.

“While the investigation is ongoing, initial information, including witness statements, evidence on the scene and video surveillance, it appears the shooting was in self defense,” the Thurston County Sheriff’s Office said in the news release, adding that there was no evidence to indicate any of the involved parties or witnesses knew the decedent.

More Here

MD: Roommate Shoots Roommate who came at him with Knives

According to the charging documents, Bennaugh called 911 just after 12:30 p.m. Wednesday and told operators he shot his roommate after an altercation between 5:30 a.m. and 6 a.m. that day. He told emergency call takers "his roommate had come at him with knives and that he shot him,"the charging documents state.

The documents list a detailed timeline of what Bennaugh told investigators happened before shots were fired. He said he went to the second floor to sleep on the living room sofa around 2 a.m. and woke up just after 5:30 a.m. to the sound of Scott Hayes in the kitchen "making a lot of noise." A few minutes later, Scott Hayes reportedly yelled and asked where the remote was.

Bennaugh said he ignored him and heard him walk behind the living room sofa, asking several times where the remote was. Bennaugh said he removed the blanket on top of his head to find Scott Hayes with two large knives, which prompted him to grab a handgun and point it at his roommate.

More Here

India Court finds Firing Pistol in Self Defense not Illegal under the Arms Act

Lucknow is not far from Nepal on the map

On January 13, 2023, a conflict occurred at an apartment complex opposite the Ghazipur police station in Indiranagar, Uttar Pradesh state, Lucknow, India. Lucknow is in north central India, not far from the border of Nepal. The conflict was reported to include two groups of young people in a dispute, a bit before midnight. Early reports said the dispute was over a parking spot, or possibly a complaint of the lack of a security guard. One of the people in the dispute, Sunil Dutt Tripathi, was attacked and suffered injuries. He fired his licensed "Glock" pistol in the air to stop the attack. No one on the other side of the dispute was injured, according to documents filed with the High Court in Lucknow, the capital of Uttar Pradesh, in a decision released in January of 2024, about a year later.

The day after the incident, the treasurer of the residents' association filed a complaint with the police, claiming Tripathi had attempted murder. From indiatimes.com: 

“Sachin and his associates started firing on us with an intention to kill me and others. There was a stampede-like situation as people started running helter-skelter. Luckily, no one suffered any injury,” Arora alleged.

By January 15, 2023, the local police charged Tripathi with several crimes, including attempted murder, and impounded his pistol, which was legally licensed.   Tripani was released on bail. It appears the charges were dropped.  No proceedings were initiated to cancel his firearms license.  The police refused to return the pistol and cartridges, claiming Tripani had violated the conditions of Section 30 of the Arms Act. Tripani appealed the decision to the Allahhabad High Court in Lucknow. The High Court found firing a licensed weapon in self-defense is not a violation of the Arms Act:

Section 30 of the Arms Act declares violation of the conditions of Arms License as an offence, but firing from a licensed weapon in self-defense is a violation of which condition of the Arms Act, neither has the learned Magistrate mentioned in the impugned order dated 02.11.2023 nor was the learned Additional Government Advocate able to tell the Court.

The High Court noted Tripathi and the people he was defending were the only people injured in the dispute, and no one was injured when Tripathi fired his "Glock". The High Court ordered the pistol and ammunition returned to Tripathi. 

Analysis: 

The neighborhood mentioned where the dispute occurred is described as a "posh" one, owned and operated by the government, with 400,000 residents. It is not a slum. India is a socialist country of sorts.

It is very difficult and expensive to obtain a permit to keep and carry a pistol for self-defense in India. If the pistol was actually a Glock (firearms reporting in India is even worse for technical details than in the USA), the cost of the pistol would be several thousand U.S. dollars, minimum. More likely it was a .32 semi-auto made in India. It is very difficult and expensive to obtain firearms made outside of India, in India.  If there were a credible case against Tripathi, it is unlikely the pistol would have been returned.  There would be ample evidence to show he violated the terms of his pistol license. The expense and difficulty of obtaining a license in India limit them to people of considerable means. This explains his ability to challenge the refusal of the police to release his firearm. In spite of India's notorious "red tape", all of this happened in less than a year. This case may set precedent in India, showing firing a licensed gun in self defense is legal conduct.

A case in California, where millions of dollars of guns were impounded because of bureaucratic errors, was resolved in eight months. In the California case, no charges were ever brought. A raid was conducted and the guns impounded, without any arrest.

This correspondent may gain access to more details about this case from associates in India. 

©2023 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

AZ: Tucson Homeowner Assaulted, Shoots Assailant

TUCSON, Ariz. (13 News) - Pima County SWAT was in Catalina looking for an assault suspect on Friday, Jan. 12.

The Pima County Sheriff’s Department said they were looking for Clifford Bretthauer in the area of Armstrong Lane and Twins Lakes Road.

Bretthauer and James McLaughlin were involved with an aggravated assault that happened in Catalina on Tuesday, Jan. 9, according to the PCSD.

McLaughlin, 47, and Clifford Bretthauer, 46, allegedly attacked a homeowner who was cleaning up a homeless encampment on his property in the 3000 block of East Lamb Drive.

More Here

GA: Man Forces way into Home, is Shot, Wounded

Warner Robins Police say the investigation revealed Graves shot Pope in self-defense after Pope forced his way into Graves’ home.

“The incident was a continuation of an earlier incident at the home,” a Wednesday news release update said.

Graves is not being charged with any crimes, police said. Pope is still hospitalized.

“This investigation is still ongoing and may result in criminal charges,” the release added.

 

More Here

District Judge: California Carry Restrictions Violate Constitution

On December 20, 2023, United States District Judge Cormac J. Carney issued an order granting the plaintiffs motions for Preliminary injunction in the case of Reno v Bonta.

The case involves the multitudinous restrictions placed on where people are allowed to bear arms in California. Judge Carney ruled the challenged provisions of the law deprive people, who have already been vetted by the state, of their right to bear arms, and are therefore prevented from taking effect. Following are excerpts from the order with commentary.

At the beginning, Judge Carney notes we live in dangerous times, and the right to self defense is a fundamental, inherent right. From the Introduction:

The right to self-defense and to defend one’s family is fundamental and inherent to our very humanity irrespective of any formal codification. In their wisdom, the Founders recognized the need for individual citizens to protect themselves and their loved ones from those that would do them harm—and they knew that such a right could not be vindicated without the right to bear arms. The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees law-abiding, responsible citizens the right to keep and bear arms for self-defense in case of confrontation.

On page 2, Judge Carney goes on to explain how the right to bear arms has been disrespected for decades. From courtlistener.com p.2:

For many years, the right to bear arms, and so necessarily the right to self-defense, was relegated to second-class status. But the United States Supreme Court made clear in its landmark decisions District of Columbia v. Heller, McDonald v. City of Chicago, and New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Incorporated v. Bruen that relegation could no longer be permitted—individuals must be able to effectuate their right to self-defense by, if they so choose, responsibly bearing arms.

On page 4, Judge Carney explains the plaintiffs in this case are permit holders, and the restrictions placed on where they can carry are a violation of their Second Amendment rights.

Plaintiffs, who are concealed carry permit holders and related organizations, brought these two lawsuits against California to challenge the constitutionality of many of SB2’s “sensitive place” provisions. They now seek a preliminary injunction enjoining California from enforcing the challenged sensitive-place provisions, asserting that many of those restrictions violate their Second Amendment rights and deprive them of their ability to defend themselves and their loved ones in public. Plaintiffs are right. Their motions for a preliminary injunction are GRANTED.

There is a minor error on page 12. Judge Carney writes that historically, sensitive places include schools and government buildings. This is not correct. Here are Judge Carney's words:

These locations include schools, government buildings, “legislative assemblies, polling places, and courthouses.”

In the binding Second Amendment decision in Bruen, only three locations were found to be "sensitive places" with historical roots at the founding. From the Bruen decision:

 Although the historical record yields relatively few 18th- and 19th-century “sensitive places” where weapons were altogether prohibited—e.g., legislative assemblies, polling places, and courthouses—we are also aware of no disputes regarding the lawfulness of such prohibitions.

It is a minor flaw in an otherwise well reasoned and argued order. On pages 40 and 41, Judge Carney shows how the Plaintiffs would suffer irreparable harm if their Constitutional rights are violated, and the government cannot suffer harm from an injunction which ends an unlawful practice. P. 40:

Because Plaintiffs have shown it is likely that the challenged SB2 provisions violate their Second Amendment rights, they have demonstrated that irreparable harm is likely without a preliminary in junction enjoining the government from enforcing those provisions.

P.41

 Moreover, the government “cannot suffer harm from an injunction that merely ends an unlawful practice” such as denying Californians’ Second Amendment rights.

The conclusion does a masterful job of summing up the need for the preliminary injunction on page 43:

The Second Amendment preserves a fundamental constitutional right for law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms for self-defense. Increasingly in modern times, with “the ubiquity of guns and our country’s high level of gun violence,” ordinary law-abiding people feel a need to carry handguns in public to protect themselves and their families against violence. Bruen, 597 U.S. at 73 (Alito, J., concurring). This may be because they “live in high-crime neighborhoods,” or because they “must traverse dark and dangerous streets in order to reach their homes after work or other evening activities,” or because they “reasonably believe that unless they can brandish or, if necessary, use a handgun in the case of attack, they may be murdered, raped, or suffer some other serious injury.” Id. CCW permitholders are among the most responsible, reliable law-abiding citizens. They have been through a vigorous vetting and training process following their application to carry a concealed handgun. The challenged SB2 provisions unconstitutionally deprive this group of their constitutional right to carry a handgun in public for self-defense. Therefore, those provisions must be preliminarily enjoined. 

Analysis. This preliminary injunction will be appealed to the Ninth Circuit by the government of California. It is unclear if any particular three judge panel of the Ninth Circuit will agree or disagree with Judge Carney. If the three judge panel agrees, the historical record shows the Ninth Circuit will then hear the case en banc. Even so, the blatant disregard of the Supreme Court Bruen decision may be sufficient for an en banc Ninth Circuit to uphold Judge Carney. It could happen. If it does, it seems unlikely the State of California would appeal the decision to the Supreme Court. If, as expected, an en banc panel strikes down Judge Carney's order, expect the Plaintiffs to appeal to the Supreme Court.

This is part of the delay, delay, delay game several circuits are playing, hoping somehow, the structure of the Supreme Court will be changed before they are forced to uphold the Second Amendment. Historically, it is similar to the games played by the Southern states to delay and prevent integration of public schools in the 1950s.

©2023 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

WA: 20-Year-Old Robbed and Stabbed, Shoots Assailant

A man was arrested last night after robbing and stabbing a man for his scooter. 

Police located the 20-year-old male victim in the 700 block of 5^th Avenue around 10:00 p.m. last night. The victim reported being robbed of his scooter then stabbed multiple times after exiting from a Metro bus near 4^th Avenue and Columbia Street.  

The victim sustained serious stab wound injuries that appeared to be life-threatening. Officers provided medical aid at the scene while waiting for Seattle Fire to arrive and take over care. SFD later transported the victim via Medic One to Harborview Medical Center.  

After being stabbed by the unknown male suspect, the victim produced a pistol and fired multiple rounds at the suspect before running northbound on 4^th Avenue then eastbound on 5^th Avenue.  

King County Sheriff’s Office deputies assisted with obtaining surveillance footage from the bus of the two involved in the incident. The suspect description was disseminated and a short time later a man matching the description of the suspect was found nearby at 5^th Avenue South and South Holgate Street.  

The man was in possession of multiple knives and found to have a non-life-threatening gunshot graze wound. SFD treated the suspect and later transported him to HMC via AMR. 

Officers collected evidence of the shooting, recovered the firearm, and found the stolen scooter abandoned at a construction site near 3^rd Avenue and Cherry Street.  

The 37-year-old suspect will be booked into King County Jail for robbery once medically cleared.

More Here

NICS Gun Sales and Background Checks for December 2023 and all of the Year

The number of gun sales estimated using the National Instant  background Check System, or NICS, for December of 2023, was about 1.74 million guns. This was the fourth highest number of gun sales for December in the NICS system.  The number of background checks was about 2.73 million. This was the sixth highest December for NICS background checks. December showed a slight drop in the trend for 2023, but is maintaining what has become the new normal of gun sales which arguably started in 2011, when annual sales passed the 10 million mark.

 

2023 had the fourth highest total for gun sales of any year recorded by the NICS system, about 15.31 million, which is virtually tied with the total gun sales for 2016.  The numbers in the NSSF chart above ( I am a member) are slightly different because the NSSF and this correspondent use slightly different methods for estimating gun sales from NICS numbers. Given the inherent uncertainty of the estimates, the numbers are very close. Both estimates show years 2016 and 2023 as very close to each other for gun sales.

The total number of privately owned firearms in the United States of America is estimated at 503 million, or about 1.5 privately owned guns for every individual in the USA.  With a current population of people over the age of 18 at 265 million, there are about 1.9 firearms per adult in the USA.

2024 is a presidential election year. Electoral politics have become the most contentious since perhaps 1860. President Lincoln was elected in a four way race. 10 Southern states refused to have Lincoln on the ballot.  At the time, the Southern States were not defying the Supreme Court. In 2023, several states are openly defying the Supreme Court decisions on the Second Amendment. About 40 percent of voters have serious concerns about the integrity of the election process. Chaos in major cities, and bizarre foreign policy decisions are making large numbers of people concerned about their security. The trend of relatively high gun sales is expected to continue.

Some of the gun sales are related to high rates of gun sales among minorities and women. Part of that is the continuing restoration of Second Amendment rights by the Supreme Court.  Minorities who have been told they are treated as second class citizens are finding they have Second Amendment rights, just as everyone else.  When a person learns they have a right to keep and bear arms, and the right is respected by the government, their attitude changes.

Internationally, the chaos is resulting in increased interest in arming citizens. Argentina's President Milei wishes to restore Argentinian's right to self defense. Nigeria politicians are urging the arming of villages. Muslim attacks on Christians in the Nigerian north are increasing. Israel has enacted minor reforms allowing a few more stellar citizens to be armed.

Without strong leadership from the United States, freedom of the seas is threatened. China is encroaching on its neighbors. The Ukrainian/Russia war continues. The Ukrainian war has become a "drone war", showing the vulnerability of armed men to ubiquitous small drones.  Iran continues to threaten Israel, the United States, and most of Europe.

This correspondent predicted the USA would reach the half billion mark in private firearms ownership in 2023. That prediction has been fulfilled.

©2023 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch