Order: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txwd.1177458/gov.uscourts.txwd.1177458.55.0.pdf Join my email list: …
source
Federal 2A Ban While Under Restraining Order Ruled UNCONSTITUTIONAL!
Recommended For You
45 Comments
Comments are closed.
Order: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txwd.1177458/gov.uscourts.txwd.1177458.55.0.pdf
Join my email list: https://leviathangroup.ac-page.com/guns-and-gadgets-sign-up-page
GNG Website & Affiliate Links: https://www.gunsngadgets.com
Support GNG via Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/GUNSandGADGETS
Blackout Coffee: https://www.blackoutcoffee.com/gng
GNG Shirts: https://bit.ly/3wuZKMJ
USCCA: http://USCCA.com/GnG
Gun Owners of America: https://gunowners.org/gunsgadgets/
Join Firearms Policy Coalition: http://bit.ly/gunsandgadgets
Join WPSN w/code GG10: https://www.watchwpsn.com/?campaign=guns&gadgets
You are a ignorant POS I bet you beat woman and I bet you are a racist also
It just makes me stand here and shake my head that “ we “ the citizens of the United States are even having to go through this I feel like we’re arguing with seven year olds that this is the way the constitution was written and “we” have to prove it to them that this is the law of our country as it was written by our founding fore fathers and yet they want to change the rules in order to gain power and dominance over “us”, when will the people finally say they had enough!
My son got a DUI when he was 18. As part of his probation he could not possess a firearm. This meant that he missed 2 hunting seasons. Why? DUI has nothing to do with gun crime yet not possessing a gun is an automatic condition of probation. Had his probation officer decided to search our home (which would have been legal) our hunting rifles in our basement would have put our son in jail for violating his probation. Ridiculous constitutional violation affecting our entire family.
I my opinion taking away someone's 2a rights because they have been convicted of a felony is unconstitutional. I can see the reasoning behind it but shall not be infringed means exactly that.
Don’t think the current administration cares about the constitution this is a socialist takeover haven’t you noticed?
I have restraining order against me from my ex in New Jersey and I live in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is this going to be a national law because I would really like to be able to carry my firearms considering I had to transfer them all after I got the restraining order 5 years ago. If no one is aware in New Jersey has no expiration dates they're restraining orders are for a lifetime
What do you say to a women with two black eyes? Nothing, you already told the bitch twice.
Great job sir!
Yep. The communist state of Orygun passed Measure 114. No 15 rd mags, can’t buy any firearm until you pass a class, that doesn’t have funding or even exist. Even police and trained military cannot purchase.
People file restraining orders all the time with no proof, glad this happened.
I agree with anyone under a restraining order should not have a firearm.
In one particular case in North Carolina back in the 60s or 70s i cant remember the decade but, a man beat his wife up pretty bad, she called the cops he was arrested, and went to jail, a magistrate allowed an immediate cash bond release, the man went home got his gun and shot his wife to death. After that a three day cool off period of three days was implemented and you remain in jail for three days regardless, then if the wife desires she can take out a restraining order, and at that time the Cops are sent to collect every gun in the house and keep them until the order is lifted, then the order is given that he is not allowed to even touch a weapon of any kind. Until the matter goes to court, and is decided on by a judge or a jury.
So yes angry domestic disputes get people killed with firearms.
As a former Cop the most dangerous places a cop can be at, is a domestic dispute, and serving warrants.
Wow! that's powerful. I think it's time for (re)initiation of the practice of judging people, and punishing them by their actions, not their state of being, ie ownership of this or that. My owning an AR, a full-suto M-14, or a tank doesn't harm ANYONE. If I own any, or all, of those things, nobody is harmed.
It's not quite correct to say that there were no restrictions for people that "beat their wife." There were no restrictions for people that allegedly beat their wife.
Long overdue ruling. I expect to see even more ruling go this way in the future, and would love to see nothing less than the entirety of all gun control laws overturned as unconstitutional, since they are.
Come on man, you know democrats don’t care about the constitution or laws. Those are just roadblocks to total government control.
Would this court decision have a bearing on Red Flag laws?
Are all these gun rights victories the result of the judges that Donald Trump nominated and got them in the court system? Has he had a tremendously large impact on our gun rights because of the judges he put in place? I would like to hear your thoughts !!!
Its about time.
1. a restraining order/protective order does not protect an alleged vicim of a crime from violence. Its just a piece of paper. A protective order doesnt stop a criminal from killing someone. It exists to bypass peoples constitutional right to bear arms. With laws like the ones for protective orders in place, the government can prevent the people from possessing firearms by issuing a protective order against them. All they need is someone willing to play victim, and there is no shortage of willing victims.
2. A person who is not convictied of any crime must not be punished in any way, including infringing upon their right to bear arms. The fraudulent courts in this country almost exclusivly grant protective orders against people who are accused of a crime but not convicted. We are innocent until proven guilty. Once a person is proven guilty there shouldnt be a need to stop them from possesing firearms as the offender should be locked up in prison. Sadly, this is the problem. the current justice system is not tough on violent crimes, so they've made a system where they take the 2A rights away from violent offenders instead of making them do their time. Taking their 2A rights away doesnt stop them from gaining and using firearms.
I have read that States like new York s governor ignoring the supreme court. How are they getting away with it? Im referring to the concealed carry
So Jared under the Bruin decision, does a firearm have to be serialized? I've seen one case of a person with a firearm with a destroyed serial number possession case was thrown out by a judge. When the Second Amendment was established, firearms were not serialized.
Which brings me to the next question, 80% lowers. Can they be sold without a serial number?
The Bruin decision backs un-serialized firearms.
So what’s next, are we just supposed to be fine with domestic violence perpetrators, murderers, rapists, pedophiles etc being able to posses guns!? No!! They are violent disgusting people that don’t deserve ANY rights! They deserve the death penalty! If you want to keep your right to keep and bear arms, don’t commit a violent crime. All gun laws are an infringement except for the laws barring violent people from owning guns. Who in their right mind would want a rapist or a domestic violence perpetrator to be able to own a gun?
It's simple, if someone's so dangerous to society to the point of they shouldn't possess a firearm, then they should be locked up in jail, prison, or the funny farm.
Thanks So much for this video. Do you think this could possibly end the Lautenberg amendment especially in states that do not have such a ban?
that's awesome
A FREE PEOPLE CAN NEVER BE CONQUERED.
This man has already been in court multiple times and has had the opportunity to defend himself in court. If this is Unconstitutional, there is no way a Red Flag process which removes the right to defend oneself until well after the fact could possibly be Constitutional.
…not that I needed anything to convince me that ERPOs are Unconstitutional…
To answer the Judge's rhetorical question: Chainsaw and D10 Caterpillar at the least.
We the people of law abiding citizens appreciate your knowledge and wisdom and your dedication as a true patriot 🇺🇸 and it is God's way that you are on your journey amen my brother and thank you amen freedom 💜🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
Someone should tell Huntington, Indiana they can't administrate the Red Flag law as they see fit especially with veterans….
Restraining orders are easy to get against anyone at anytime, my ex-wife got a restraining order against me even though I never once threatened her or abused her in any way, she got that order because her lawyer told her to in order to gain status in court. With that they took my guns and it took me years to get them back and it was all because of a false claim being made in court that I had no way to defend against and they didn't care if it was a false claim or not, she never suffered any repercussions for all the lies she told in court and some of her lies I had real evidence that they were lies but the court refused to see it, in California it sucks to be a man while going through divorce , massively one sided.
One brick at a time
Here is my understanding of the second amendment. 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. It does not limit to just for self defense or protection in the home. My understanding of the 2nd amendment is we the people afforded by the 2nd amendment have the right to bear and keep arms wherever we are. People have added the "protection or self defense in the home".
Now according to what I have found the government decided a militia to be illegal. I have not seen or found any reason that was done. So why is it that a militia is supposedly illegal? The 2nd amendment states "A Well Regulated Militia". Now I have found that even a militia that is formed by a military vet, which would be "well regulated" is illegal. Why is that? Is it because the government is scared of the people which are their employers? That's right they are our employees.
The only places I can understand having any restrictions on possessing a firearm is in a government building (ie court or federal building) or police department or sheriff's department. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Good news. Constitutional carry is the only acceptable terms for state's rights.
Well I'll tell you this. Once these laws are struck down , as they should be. You'll see more mass shootings. I said 20 years ago that crazy shootings are going to start once the government decided that it wants gun confiscation. So the run of the mill shooting started. That didn't do what they wanted. Then i said, well they will now have shootings of women and children. Why? Because they know, like what mad mothers did for drunk driving laws that there would be an outcry from women to take away guns. Well that wasn't enough. So you had school shootings. They thought for sure that would do it. Nope. Now these unconstitutional laws are being tossed out. So now they are going to go for the jugular. A mass shooting with automatic weapons is on the horizon. The government will cause this. Donald Trump is going to run again. They know they can't beat him. So they are going to pull out all the stops. They are going to try their best to smear him again. Once they see they can't , what do you think is going to happen next? Nobody in their right mind wants to pay 5 bucks a gallon for gas. Nobody wants to barely put food on the table. Every time people were asked before the midterm elections what people thought. It was overwhelmingly Republican. Then the democrats won again. I have very little faith in the election system now. Only in person voting should be allowed. With this mail in garbage all you see is " hey we found " a ton of mail in ballots that turned the tide democratic. So i guess only Republicans vote in person!!! Sadly it's going to get worse with each win for the constitution. They are going to force this until something breaks. Red flag laws are unconstitutional. It's only a matter of time. The government is becoming tyrannical. They want a mass uprising so they can declare marshall law, and ride the wave to gun confiscation.
Thank You Sir..good news.i have a few questions. Do You think the law will ever stop stepping on the rights of felons? Do You think after paying for crimes against society,felons should receive their God given rights back…seeing that we are a society based on a Judeo/christian system and in that GodJehovah is a God of forgiveness and reconciliation? After all if a person pays back all they have done even in monetary terms and payed all court costs and the case was 40 years old…..would it be wrong or not in this day and age to stop said ind.from having the means to protect.wife ,children, grandchildren, church,and country…? Thank You again Jarod
So judges follow the laws? When did they stop legislating?
Thank you Texas
How about getting all gun control laws declared unconstitutional
Thank You …
Shall not be infringed upon!!!!! Period
So does this apply to protective orders in Arizona? I'm currently going through a protective order right now in AZ and have been told I'm not allowed to purchase posses guns or ammo furthermore I have to surrender them to the nearest police station. Can someone give me some answers?
All gun laws are unconstitutional
So, not that I'm a felon, but the Gun Control of 1968 that prohibited felons from owning gun don't pass the sniff test for the history test neither.
Great news, and thank you.
Jared you put on a video on the 18th sun morning,. It was blocked while I was trying to watch it, I did a restart and went directly to your channel and it was blocked and removed . Just reporting that too you.