The anti-gun movement seeks to ban firearms such as the AR-15 and AK-47s as well as certain types of magazines. This video addresses a major argument being litigated in Second Amendment cases today. The Video discusses a Mark Smith article, which rebuts a popular anti-gun argument that a single sentence in NYSRPA v. Bruen concerning “unprecedented societal concerns or dramatic technological changes” allows lower courts to ignore Heller’s “in common use” test in “arms ban” cases, i.e., “assault weapon”/magazine ban cases. This video teaches that this particular sentence in Bruen does no such thing.
Mark’s article can be downloaded from this site
—————–
TIMESTAMPS
—————–
0:00 Anti-Gunners Clinging To Hope
1:41 Laws Passed Since NYSRPA
2:51 Heller Common Use Test
6:02 Bruen Didn’t Change Heller
9:13 What Overruling Precedent Looks Like
13:02 Bruen = Heller
15:32 The MAIN Gun Ban Argument
17:32 ‘Other Cases’ & Modern Weapons
21:04 How The Anti-Gunners Try ….
26:59 Same Arguments in Heller
34:08 Heller vs Bruen
38:49 Thank You!
—————–
Follow Along On Social Media
—————–
The Four Boxes Diner serves up hot, fresh Second Amendment news and analysis. You’ll get the inside scoop from constitutional attorney Mark W. Smith, a member of the United States Supreme Court Bar, a professor, a frequent Fox News guest, and a New York Times bestselling author. Mark’s books include The Official Handbook of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy, First They Came for the Gun Owners, and Duped: How the Anti-gun Lobby Exploits the Parkland School Shooting, and How Gun Owners Can Fight Back. Mark’s scholarship has been used by lawyers before the U.S. and he work has been quoted by a federal judge (Roger Benitez) in declaring California’s so-called “assault weapon” ban to be unconstitutional under the Second Amendment.
To defend your liberty, you need to understand the “four boxes” of American liberty: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the ammunition box. We give you the information you need, and we hope to serve as your source for Bill of Rights news and analysis.
—————–
SUMMARY
—————–
Great video… 🙂🔥💪
I’d like to clarify that overruling an abortion decision is perhaps slightly different than overruling 2A rights… has abortion been acknowledged as a pre-existing unalienable right? If not, that is a difference worth expressing, as overruling 2A decisions would need to reach a higher bar, which I don’t believe is truly lawful nor ethical, as how would pre-existing unalienable rights be overruled, wouldn’t that be a violation of basic fundamental rights of which “shall not be infringed” is clearly meant to safeguard and preserve, which limits the Govt. from ruling against or overruling any precedent to violate our pre-existing unalienable rights? Where is it outlined the Govt. has any expressed right to interfere with a pre-existing unalienable right other than its duty to acknowledge and support the fact it exists?
Great analysis. How many decades until we have relief????????????
Hopefully we can get the entire NFA dismantled because there are a few million suppressors, just under 200k fully autos, and a few hundred thousand sbr/sbs in use. I would argue none of those are anymore dangerous than a regular firearm because sbr/sbs, suppressors. And fully autos are almost never used in crimes.
Thank you for going over this topic .
A judge in carson City NV stated that magazines are not "parts" covered under PLACA due to the modern firearm firing one round without a magazine. Can you discuss how the arguments for magazines are being covered under the placa in relation to Scotus's decisions?
Another phenomenal lesson! Thank you.
I truly appreciate your hard work and thorough content. Thank you!
Algorithm
1791
My concern with the common use test is that when new personal weapons are invented, control advocates can jump in and ban them. But the Second Amendment's language should protect phasers when they exist.
State are braking the law , 10 amendment says all the federal bill of Rights IS FEDERAL POWER this is treason on the states
Can a future Supreme Court overturn the text, history, and tradition test?
Love these big nerd deep dives. Fantastic!
Anyone else feel like US Citizens need to retake exams on US Constitution and Civics every 1-2 years to maintain their citizenship? Because having it as a birth right doesn't seemingly work. Treat it the same as some of the "certifications".
That nuanced approach dicta is so frustrating. I really wish the Supreme Court would stop needlessly expounding on points when brevity and clarity would be enough.
I do not understand why the Pro Gun Rights organizations have not banded together and attacked the "linchpin" of all gun control "laws": 'Maximillian Sonzinsky v. United States', 300 U.S. 506 (1937), where the Hughes Supreme Court found FDR's 'National Firearms Act of 1934' to be "constitutional", despite its two patently UNconstitutional Infringements on the Constitutional Right to Keep and Bear Arms: "taxing" and "regulating" the Right. The Court "justified" its decision by using cites totally UNrelated to the RKBA. Moreover, FDR's former enforcers of Amendment XVIII … the Prohibition Squad (aka "The Untouchables") … nka the Alcohol Tax Unit (ATU) of the Treasury Department, either intentionally or stupidly framed Sonzinsky by mismeasuring his shotgun's barrel length, claiming it was a "short-barreled shotgun" which had not been registered with the Treasury Department and its $200 "tax" on registration had not been paid. Those "special agents" of the ATU claimed the barrel was "15-7/8 inches long", while it was actually 18-5/8 inches in length. Regardless, the "shall not be infringed" prohibition of Amendment II overrode both the "taxation" and "registration" provisions of the "parent" document: the Constitution of the United States, for both are Infringements prohibited by Amendment II.
I do not understand why the Pro Gun Rights organizations have not banded together and attacked the "linchpin" of all gun control "laws": 'Maximillian Sonzinsky v. United States', 300 U.S. 506 (1937), where the Hughes Supreme Court found FDR's 'National Firearms Act of 1934' to be "constitutional", despite its two patently UNconstitutional Infringements on the Constitutional Right to Keep and Bear Arms: "taxing" and "regulating" the Right. The Court "justified" its decision by using cites totally UNrelated to the RKBA. Moreover, FDR's former enforcers of Amendment XVIII … the Prohibition Squad (aka "The Untouchables") … nka the Alcohol Tax Unit (ATU) of the Treasury Department, either intentionally or stupidly framed Sonzinsky by mismeasuring his shotgun's barrel length, claiming it was a "short-barreled shotgun" which had not been registered with the Treasury Department and its $200 "tax" on registration had not been paid. Those "special agents" of the ATU claimed the barrel was "15-7/8 inches long", while it was actually 18-5/8 inches in length. Regardless, the "shall not be infringed" prohibition of Amendment II overrode both the "taxation" and "registration" provisions of the "parent" document: the Constitution of the United States, for both are Infringements prohibited by Amendment II.
ALL THIS IS TECHNICAL LEGALESE NOISE… THE "INTENT", in layman's terms, WHY the Second Amendment was written… was to give The People the right to bear arms that were at least "equal to" any arms that could be brought against them by hostile actions… whether that be by Indigenous Natives, Invading Armies, or any Domestic Threat to destroy the Republic such as the Civil War or the Government itself turning Tyrannical like the King did… ALL that was ABOVE AND BEYOND basic protection of yourself, your family, your community and hunting to feed everyone… 2A was about PROTECTING THE NATION AND THE FLAG… against anyone who would destroy it… and you needed weapons that were EQUAL TO ANY WEAPON your enemy would have or invent… end of discussion… and NO ONE has proposed this logic to the Supreme Court… WHY?
Anyone who supports the 2A needs to read DC v Heller, a masterful piece of logic and history authored by Scalia. Scalia's clear writing and reasoning in support of law and liberty marked him for assassination at the command of the Marxist, homosexual, natural born British East African usurper.
We need an campaigne to make all firearms and accessories in common use status…not only AR15/10 but also Ak47, FALs, MP5 and their clones… 10% or more (US population) is probably the threshold to consider as common use hence gun ban would be impossible..
The Lower Courts in fact DID NOT screw it up over the 10 years from Heller to Bruen…they did exactly as their Communist handlers told them to do, to disarm the American Patriot !!! The Lower Court Democrapts clearly have NO concern for the Constitution, and it shows to the EXTREME. Yet the Supreme Court allows them to continue this facade by refusing to hear Anti-2A Cases over the past many decades. The Communists that have infitrated the Government entities, are destroying America from the INSIDE, as planned back in the 50's.
Maybe…MAYBE…we can now start to get the SC off their collective butts, and get the 2nd Amendment back to where it belongs…with WE THE PEOPLE !
So, Kill the NFA, Kill the GCA, and DELARE the AFT Unconstitutional, and let's get back to a real America !
A Joy to listen to your analysis, Sir.
Mark, a really great video, and the information you provided.
What's going on with the magazine bans in New York? I thought they could not do this.
what about "Machine guns"? can we use "In common use" for military weapons to justify civilians having the arms the military has?
Stay busy, this is good stuff!
bravo its perfect lesson.Thenks
Take as long as you need Mark. I always make myself available to absorb your wisdom. This is a superlative summary of the arguments in "gun ban" litigation in my lay opinion. You have provided, here, a complete outline for any brief. It seems to me all anyone need do is take this outline and go through the Heller, McDonald, Caetano, and Bruen decisions to not just provide argument, but specific "Judicial Guidance" in any arms ban case. I truly hope that judges and clerks actually see your work.
Anti 2 A judges should be removed because they are implimenting personal preference over established SCOTUS 2A decisions. If an employee continues to not follow the established rules of the employer they will be fired. Defund the IRS and ATF. With the IRS backed by the ATF confiscating the firearm application form's that do not contain any monitary information. Is an unacceptable behavior of a govt agency. Defund the two agencies.
Mass school shootings will never end, because the liberals NEED THEM to promote their anti-gun agenda! Hence why minimal is being done to identify these individuals or prevent their actions!
Just think about this….how many fire doors are in schools, and when was the last school fire??? And yet, school REFUSE to spend a couple of hundred dollars on classroom door baracades!
Until there are repercussions on the lower courts, the liberal judges will continue to allow infringements until SCOTUS decides to hear another case. Hopefully it’s soon. Massachusetts here just hoping to buy a decent rifle younger than I am …
Great video! Thanks for sharing.
Thank you Mark appreciate your time and efforts in helping us protect our 2A rights
Could we just ban TARDS and call it a day.