Another Step Toward My Vision

Posted on by

Quote of the Day

A federal judge in Mississippi has just dismissed a machine gun possession charge, marking the second time in recent history that such a case has been thrown out. Chris Eger of Guns.com first reported on the case, U.S. vs. Justin Bryce Brown, explaining that Judge Carlton W. Reeves ruled the federal charge was inconsistent with American history and tradition regarding firearm regulations.

The case is yet another test of the 2022 Supreme Court ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which established that gun laws must align with the nation’s historical precedent.

Lisa Greene
February 6, 2025
Another Machine Gun Case Gets Tossed Out of Federal Court—What This Means for Gun Owners

Another step toward my vision of machine gun competitions in high school by 2032.

And, as I predicted back in November of 2022, this is the expected result of the Bruen decision.

Share

4 thoughts on “Another Step Toward My Vision”

  2. Mark Smith at 4 boxes diner is dubious. But hey. It could be the start of a great conversation. A win is a win. Just hearing one of the chattering caste say something like that is amazing.
    It seemed obvious that calling something “dangerous and unusual”, and “not in common use”. When you and yours have regulated them out of existence and “common use”. Was to legally hypocritical to have standing. On top of the plain reading of the 2A.
    But we are talking government paid black robed illiterates here. From which we have witnessed many times. No hypocrisy to great, nor shame to low, in their desire to lick the boots of power.
    Maybe they’re actually starting to see what is arrayed against them?
    We can only hope!

    • I listened to Smith this morning after I had made this blog post.

      I still say it is a win. Small? Sure, okay. But ruling for conviction would have been worse.

      • “But ruling for conviction would have been worse.”
        And the start of another appeals process? That maybe the 5th circuit doesn’t want to deal with?
        I still maintain that the right to defend oneself, includes the right to defend one’s hearing.
        Which is covered by the 2A.

Comments are closed.