Quote of the Day

SCOTUS’s current practice of deciding like 50 cases a year may have worked in a system where the lower courts acted in good faith. SCOTUS would decide Bruen, and then lower courts would do their best to faithfully apply it.

Instead, the antigun circuits almost always find a way to rule against the Second Amendment except on the specific issues SCOTUS has decided. The Ninth Circuit is now on its 10th en banc to reverse a pro-2A panel ruling.

Sure, maybe SCOTUS will take the occasional case like Wolford and correct a particularly egregious ruling. But the Ninth Circuit’s antigun majority knows there is no way SCOTUS will grant cert to every antigun ruling, or even a large minority of them. So they’ll keep doing what they are doing, and so what if a few get reversed. Most won’t.

To actually correct this, SCOTUS needs to go back to deciding many more cases each year, or alternatively, issue short and curt summary reversals very liberally.

For example, when the Ninth Circuit (probably) upholds the handgun roster’s MDM and CLI requirements, the Supreme Court shouldn’t need a full cert grant and briefing to explain why that is wrong. A one page per curiam saying there is no historical tradition of such “feature” requirements, and California can’t ban popular handguns, would suffice.

Kostas Moros @MorosKostas
Posted on X, December 30, 2025

I would be interested to see what would happen if SCOTUS returned a one page per curium within minutes of when one of these outrageous decisions were punted up to them. An automated AI system could easily do it. If the autopen was good enough for Biden, then an AI should be good enough for SCOTUS, right? Would the lower courts continue playing these games? Or would they start Calvinballing it?

I’m inclined to believe we will not get 2^nd Amendment justice until people are prosecuted.

Quote of the Day

In America, we don’t need to look to our nation’s leader for an explanation of how it happened. We know it will happen again, likely too many times to count.

But America’s deep, stubborn will against any logical or sensible gun control is what keeps us stuck in this cycle. We must not become numb to the grief, loss and horror of gun violence.

Robin Epley
December 16, 2025
Two mass shootings, two responses: Australia acts while America accepts | Opinion

Ms. Epley, we already have a very logical and sensible gun law on the books. And if it was enforced it would dramatically reduce the number of mass shootings. The problem is there is not enough political will to enforce it.

Maybe you have heard of this law. It is called the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It can and should be enforced via 18 USC 241 and 242.

Quote of the Day

The inch was seemingly given, so it is not surprising to see pursuit of the mile. Gun ban advocates are emboldened by their perceived victories in firearm production changes, and Ruger is the latest target on a list that won’t end until the firearm prohibition lobby decides what guns are allowed to be sold or courts step in to enforce the law.

NRA-ILA
November 17, 2025
NRA-ILA | Ruger Next Target in Threat-Based Gun Control

Of course, these laws will eventually be overturned, but it is expensive, takes a lot of time, and is a big hassle. In the meantime, we can taunt them with strings, a business card size piece of metal, and other things the ATF has declared are also machine guns.

But, of course, eventually we will have to start prosecuting these criminals before they will stop infringing on our specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms.

Quote of the Day

The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department has systematically denied thousands of law-abiding Californians their fundamental Second Amendment right to bear arms outside the home—not through outright refusal, but through a deliberate pattern of unconscionable delay that renders this constitutional right meaningless in practice.

The scope of this constitutional violation is staggering. Between January
2024 and March 2025, Defendants received 3,982 applications for new concealed carry licenses. Of these, they approved exactly two—a mere 0.05% approval rate that cannot be explained by legitimate disqualifying factors alone. This is not bureaucratic inefficiency; it is systematic obstruction of constitutional rights.

The mechanics of this obstruction are equally damning. Defendants force
applicants to wait an average of 281 days—over nine months—just to begin processing their applications, with some waiting as long as 1,030 days (nearly three years). The median delay is 372 days. These delays far exceed California’s own statutory
requirement that licensing authorities provide initial determinations within 90 days, demonstrating Defendants’ flagrant disregard for both state law and constitutional obligations.

The human cost is profound. As of May 2025, approximately 2,768
applications for new licenses remain pending, with interviews scheduled as late as November 2026—more than two years after some applications were first submitted. Numerous applicants simply gave up and withdrew their applications, often after waiting months in Defendants’ deliberately stalled process. These are not abstract statistics; they represent thousands of law-abiding citizens who have been stripped of their constitutional right to self-defense outside their homes.

U.S. Department of Justice
September 30, 2025
United States of America v. Los Angels County Sheriffs Department, and Robert Luna, in his official capacity as Sheriff of Los Angeles County (backup here)

According to numerous sources, and Copilot:

until the LA County concealed carry case, DOJ had never used § 12601 for Second Amendment violations. That makes this lawsuit a historic first—a signal that DOJ now considers systemic denial of gun rights a civil rights issue.

Copilot has this to say about my assertion the infringement will continue until criminal charges are pursued against the perpetrators:

Will Infringements Stop Without Criminal Charges?

Not likely. Civil suits can force policy changes, but they don’t carry the deterrent weight of personal accountability. Officials can stall, delay, or reinterpret rulings without fear of jail time. That’s why your call for criminal enforcement resonates—it’s about consequences, not just corrections.

Copilot offered to draft a model indictment. I accepted the offer:

United States District Court

Criminal Indictment United States of America v. [Defendants]

Count One – Conspiracy Against Rights (18 U.S.C. § 241)

The Grand Jury charges:

1. Beginning on or about January 1, 2022, and continuing through the present, in the County of [X], State of [Y], the defendants [Name 1], [Name 2], and others known and unknown to the Grand Jury, did knowingly and willfully conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, and intimidate citizens in the free exercise and enjoyment of rights secured to them by the Constitution and laws of the United States, namely, the right to keep and bear arms under the Second Amendment.
2. The object of the conspiracy was to obstruct and delay the issuance of concealed carry permits to qualified applicants, through intentional administrative backlog, arbitrary denials, and the imposition of unlawful requirements not authorized by state law.
3. In furtherance of the conspiracy, the defendants:
   • Directed staff to ignore or delay processing of applications.
   • Required applicants to submit additional documentation not required by law.
   • Denied permits without cause or explanation.
   • Maintained internal communications expressing intent to “slow-walk” approvals to discourage lawful carry.

All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 241.

Count Two – Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law (18 U.S.C. § 242)

The Grand Jury further charges:

4. On or about [specific date], in the County of [X], State of [Y], defendant [Name] acting under color of law as [Title/Position], did willfully deprive [Victim Name], a citizen of the United States, of rights secured by the Constitution, namely the right to keep and bear arms under the Second Amendment.
5. The deprivation occurred when [Name], acting in his official capacity, denied [Victim] a concealed carry permit despite full legal eligibility, and did so based on personal bias against firearm ownership and in furtherance of the conspiracy described in Count One.

All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 242.

Notice of Special Findings

The Grand Jury finds that the offenses charged:

• Were committed under color of law.
• Involved multiple victims.
• Were part of a pattern or practice of rights violations.

Here is what others are saying:

• DOJ sues LA sheriff’s office in its first-ever gun-rights lawsuit over carry delays
• Justice Department files suit against LA County Sheriff over concealed carry delays | Fox News
• Justice Department sues LA sheriff’s department over gun permit delays
• DOJ sues LA over ‘unreasonable’ gun permit delays
• Justice Department Lawsuit Alleges Los Angeles Sheriff Processes Concealed Carry Licenses Too Slowly
• Feds sue L.A. County sheriff for ‘unreasonable’ delays in issuing concealed gun permits
• Justice Department files lawsuit against Los Angeles County Sheriff in support of gun owners seeking permits – CBS Los Angeles (see the Sheriff’s Department’s response here)

This is a good start. But I won’t be popping the cork on the champagne until the first perp goes to jail with all their appeals exhausted.

Quote of the Day

The US Justice Department’s top civil rights official said the division is considering making gun rights a formal priority, in a significant shift from its traditional focus.

Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon said in an interview with Bloomberg that the department is reviewing whether certain state and local gun control measures infringe on citizens’ rights.“The Second Amendment is one of the constitutional rights we are committed to defending,” Dhillon said. “We’re adding that to our analysis where states are violating constitutional rights.”

She declined to name specific jurisdictions under review but added, “I think it’s all pretty obvious where people’s rights are being violated.”

 Myles Miller
May 9, 2025
Trump’s DOJ Weighs Gun Rights as a Focus for Civil Rights Division

I won’t believe it until I see some politicians being hauled away to prison in orange jumpsuits. We less talk and a lot more action.

NICS needs to be eliminated:

Rand Paul Probes ATF Secret Surveillance Program

Concerned over reports of secret surveillance of American gun owners by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), U.S. Sen. Rand Paul is asking for answers.

On April 10, Sen. Paul, the chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee, wrote a letter to ATF Director Daniel Driscoll requesting information on a secretive program that appears to allow the federal government to monitor law-abiding Americans attempting to exercise their Second Amendment rights.

According to Sen. Paul, based on limited public information, the NICS Audit Log Review (Monitoring) system appears to allow ATF agents to request monitoring of a target for time frames ranging from 30 to 180 days after providing identifying information and applicable or potential violations of statute. Upon approval, the ATF would receive an alert(s) from the FBI using the information in its National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).

People should go to jail over this. I hope they enjoy their trials.

Quote of the Day

The majority doesn’t seem to know that a flintlock musket would not fire without a flint, meaning that it is an essential part of an arm protected by the Second Amendment.  And speaking of flintlocks, given the majority’s imperative that the more inferior the arm, the better, modern repeating arms that fire smokeless cartridges aren’t protected because single-shot flintlock firearms are available.  But Heller explicitly rejected that argument.

While claiming that a magazine that holds over ten rounds is not an arm, the majority asserts that a magazine that holds ten or less is an arm because it “is necessary to the ordinary operation” of the firearm “as intended.”  Ordinary operation as intended by whom?  This made up distinction could be used to justify a ban on magazines that hold more than two rounds, as that would still allow the semiautomatic function.

Stephen Halbrook
April 3, 2025
Second Amendment Roundup: 9th Circuit Upholds California Magazine Ban (Again)

It is not that the 9^th Circuit Court “doesn’t seem to know.” They know what they are doing. They are just playing stupid.

They have delayed the correct ruling on the question of whether 10+ round magazines are protected arms since 2017. I will not be surprised if it they manage to delay it for a full decade. They should be prosecuted for this.