Month: March 2024

(1100 words)

After Heller, the Courts of Appeals have coalesced around a “two-step” framework for analyzing Second Amendment challenges that combines history with means-end scrutiny. [xCite item=”75DAVPP7″ p=8 pos=0 pos=0]. Justice Thomas went on Today, we decline to adopt that two-part approach. In keeping with Heller, we hold that when the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct. [xCite item=”75DAVPP7″ p=8 pos=1].

If the plain text of the Second Amendment covers the individual’s conduct, the government must demonstrate that the regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Only if a firearm regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition may a court conclude that the individual’s conduct falls outside the Second Amendment’s “unqualified command.” [xCite item=”75DAVPP7″ p=8 pos=2].

It takes a certain amount of chutzpah to claim that the Bruen court said that the plain text portion needed the challengers to prove anything apart from their conduct being within the ambit of the Second Amendment. There is never a need for the challengers to prove that an arm is not unusual or not dangerous.
Read More

B.L.U.F.
Judge Krause beclowns himself in his written dissent. He should have kept his mouth shut so people only thought him a foold. Instead, he chose to write his opinion, removing all doubt.
(2000 words)

The Third Circuit court declined to rehear Lara en banc. This left the merit panel’s opinion that 18, 19, and 20-year-olds are part of the people and their rights shall not be infringed.

Six of the 14 judges would have granted the rehearing. Judge Krause decided to beclown himself with a written dissent.

When The People ratified the Bill of Rights, they did not intend to bind the nation in a straightjacket. They intended to bind the government in a straightjacket.

Our constitution is unusual in that it is built around limiting the government as much as possible, while reserving for the state and the people as much power as they can retain.

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. is some of the strongest language in the constitution. It is a straightjacket, binding the government. The government has succeeded in escaping that straightjacket. We are fighting to get it back into that straightjacket.

The Supreme Court, has stated many times, that the meaning of the plain text of the constitution is set when it was adopted and the meaning of the plain text of the amendments is set when the amendment is ratified.
Read More

There have been some “interesting” developments in the Circuit Courts.

Out in the Ninth Circuit court, we are starting to see a game where three judge merit panels are placing 2A cases in limbo, pending the outcome of the Duncan v. Bonta en banc opinion. This is just a delay tactic. It is transparent and not just a nasty game.

The rogue judges on the Ninth Circuit will do anything to stop from ruling in favor of The People.

On the other side of the country, the Third Circuit court refused to hear Lara v. Evanchick en banc. The district court found that the state could infringe on the rights of 18, 19, and 20-year-olds. The merits panel of the Third Circuit reversed and remanded the case back to the district court.

The state appealed for a rehearing, en banc. That rehearing was denied. This is a win for us.

There are still a number of 2A cases seeking cert before the Supreme Court. I’ll continue to monitor to see what happens.

The state has been arguing for two steps in doing Second Amendment challenges. The first is forcing the plaintiffs to “prove” that the Second Amendment is implicated. This is being called into question by the good guys. The arguments from the Second Amendment advocates are getting stronger and more on point regarding rogue inferior courts.

Lawfare is alive and well out in Chicago. New Jersey’s AG penned a letter to Glock signed by the standard evil AG’s demanding that Glock be prepared to be sued into oblivion. Plenty of trade secrets and other things that are sure to “leak” once the state has finished discovery.

I’m dealing with the arsehole neighbor. I had to go measure everything to make sure that the test range was far enough away from the neighbor’s house. It is. He just doesn’t like the sound of gun fire and is doing the “shots fired” through 911. Had to deal with cops.

“I don’t answer questions”. Then the cop lied about the RSA. I now have a copy on hand, just in case.

I’m slowly making my way through [xCite item=”H7824SZ9″ pos=0]. It is a good history of Miller. Grist for the Mill.

Of the cases discussed in the blog, do you have any questions? Are there any subjects I should expand on?

Have a fantastic weekend, all. The comments are open.

Initial impressions:

So what is this thing? Well, it is a bearing holding a bushing with an endmill.

When we are trimming cases to length, we use what we can measure. For some cartridges, this makes sense. For others, it is nearly impossible.

Our goal is to have a cartridge correctly seated in the chamber with the bullet at the correct distance from the rifling (or just touching), and the distance from the end of the cartridge to the face of the bolt be correct.

Consider a .45 ACP round. The cartridge is designed to position itself in the chamber based on the mouth of the cartridge. When the cartridge is fully seated in the chamber, the mouth of the case will be resting against a feature in the chamber.

The overall length of the case should be such that the base of the case is at a known, correct, distance from the face of the bolt. Using the mouth of the case allows us good control of bullet to rifling distance.

30-30 Winchester, .45 Colt, .303 British, 7.62x54R all position the cartridge according to the front of the case rim.

With a rimmed cartridge, the thickness of the rim is known. This means that the distance from the base of the case to the face of the bolt is the controlled distance.

By correctly seating the bullet and by making sure that the length of the case is correct, we get control the distance the bullet is from the rifling.

In some senses, rimmed cases are the easiest to measure and keep within specifications.

More modern cartridges seat against the shoulder. This gives good control over the distance between the bullet and the rifling, and supposedly, good control of the distance between the base of the case and the face of the bolt.

The issue is that measuring from that hypothetical shoulder location to the mouth and the base is a little difficult.

We address this by “bumping the shoulder”. This is using the reloading press to reform the shoulder at the correct distance from the base of the case. At that point, trimming the case to length based on overall length should give good results.

To trim a case to length, we need to be able to repeatably cut the case to the same length. Thus, we need to have some way of making sure that the cutter is the correct distance from the base of the case.

On a case with a shoulder, we can either measure from the base of the case or from some other known location on the case.

One method used is to have a rod of known length that pokes out of the flash hole. This stop rod keeps the cutter from getting any closer to the face pressed against the base of the case.

When done correctly, this is quick, easy, and very repeatable.

The issue is that each cartridge needs its own stop rod.

Another method is when the cutter is kept from advancing beyond a known location. If I could, I would use my milling machine for this.

The cutter would spin in the spindle, when the quill is brought down it will stop when it hits the quill stop. Very fast, very repeatable.

Most of the trimming devices that have a lathe like spindle that has the cutter works this way. There is a stop collar that keeps the “spindle” from moving to far.

My issue with that style is that it is a little slower and I don’t trust the stops.

Which takes us to the last time. A trimmer that is based on the distance from a known location on the shoulder to the cutter.

Since we’ve positioned and shaped the shoulder correctly in the reloading press, measuring from the shoulder should be consistent.

This is what the UGLY SRT does.

The SRT consists of 5 major components. The first is the cutter. This is just a standard 4 flute 3/8″ endmill. The size is by a mark I eyeball, so it could be anything close.

The next component is the body. This is a simple bit of turning. It has a slip fit for the cutter at one end and is bored to size on the other end.

The cutter slips into the hole for it and is held in place by two set screws.

A baring has been pressed into place at the other end and makes the third major component.

The next major component is a simple disk with a single set screw in it. This is to allow you to adjust the depth of cut.

The final component is the collet. This slips into the bearing. It has a shoulder to press a case against.

To operate, this is simple. Chuck the endmill into a drill. When the drill is running, the endmill will turn and the housing will turn. The collet and inner race of the bearing will not rotate.

Slide a case into the collet and press it into the cutter. When it bottoms out on the shoulder in the collet, you will have cut the case to a length.

This is very consistent.

Adjusting the depth of cut is also simple.

If you want to make the depth of cut less, you make sure that the adjustment disk held in place and that it is firm against the body. You then release the endmill from the housing, slide a feeler gauge of the right size between the body and the adjustment disk. Tighten the set screws to lock the endmill/cutter in place.

Reposition the adjustment disk tight against the housing and lock it there.

This is dirt simple. It is an adjustment method that I will be using in my designs.

To cut more, loosen the adjustment disk, slip the correct feeler gauge between the body and the adjustment disk. Lock the adjustment disk in place. There is now a gap between the adjustment disk and the body. Release the endmill, push the adjustment disk against the housing, lock the endmill in place.

Everything about this is simple, well constructed. The adjustment process is different but easy.

I’ve only tested on a few cases, but I think this might be my end goal for shouldered cases.

The only downside I’ve identified, so far, is that I have to purchase different collets depending on the case I’m trimming. And I’m not sure if I’ll be able to manufacture them from the tooling I have on hand.

More to when I do my next large trim run.

B.L.U.F.
This case is quoted in Heller as the Court’s understanding of the meaning of “The People”. In reading the opinion, it becomes crystal clear that the Supreme Court has been using text, history, and tradition for a long time.

(2500 words)

Introduction

There are numerous terms we use to describe the courts and judges of the United States. The first term is “inferior”. This is a technical term. The Constitution establishes the Supreme Court and such inferior courts as congress might authorize.

All courts are inferior to the Supreme Court.

Below the Supreme Court are the Circuit Courts and state Supreme Courts. Under the Circuit courts are the district courts.

The states also have hierarchies of courts.

Inferior courts are supposed to follow the guidance given to them by their superiors. When they do not, they are “rogue” courts or justices.

I use the term “agenda driven” to describe those courts, judges, and justices that are so driving by their agenda that they can twist the plain text to mean whatever they want it to mean.

Listening to some questions and comments from circuit judges, it is often easy to identify those agenda-driven judges. When a judge says, “It can’t mean shall not infringe because that would mean we can’t regulate guns!”. It is pretty clear that their agenda is more important than the law.

Text, history, and tradition

Read More

A beautiful video with details of the artists, you’ll have to click through to YouTube to watch.

The short version, from TV as a child:

The long version

My lady has been off and on the book of face for the last 30 hours or so. She has been reporting on all the horrible, rotten things that have been happening to all of her friends and people of the town.

Did we notice that the electricity was out? Yes, we did.

What did it mean to us? Our movie night was interrupted.

That was it.

We were already running the wood stove, it kept right on running. We use heat powered fans to move the air off the wood stove. Those kept right on running.

I lit the oil lamp and there was plenty of light. She wanted more, so I lit the camp light, and she was able to continue to do her craft work.

We went to bed a little early.

The biggest issue? All the people who were stealing my bandwidth! Dirty thieves.

On a normal day, switching to a hot spot slows things down, but everything continues to function. When everybody is trying to hit the same cell tower to keep up with the book of face and Candy Crush, there is no bandwidth left for me to do actual work.

Last night we had steak, potatoes, onions, and mushrooms. No issues. This morning I had my normal Sunday meal, an omelette. The only difference was that I got home fries instead of toasted homemade bread.

Lunch was normal. Everything was normal except for streaming services being down.

Oh, that included hot showers for everybody. While we have an electric water heater, it isn’t required to take a hot shower. We have a rechargeable, battery-powered shower head. We boiled some water on the stove, added cold water from the taps into a 5 gal bucket. That gave us warm water and a “hot” shower.

Being without electric for a couple of days shouldn’t be an impossible thing.

Relax, read a book, do some hand crafts.

I hope everybody in the New England area is warm, safe and happy.

I laughed when I watched this because she started her video the same way I did, but better.

Liberty Doll, of you are reading our blog, thank you.

One of the things I keep reading, and I want to clarify:

No attribution because this, or versions of it, have been seen throughout the Internet.

Judge Coleman’s ruling does not apply to “illegal Immigrants”, “illegal aliens”, “green card holders”, “permanent residents”, or “citizens”. It ONLY applies to Mr. Carbajal-Flores.

But let’s compare this to the Rahimi case. Mr. Rahimi is a nasty, evil, no good, piece of shit. He is a bad guy.

His case is before the Supreme Court. They will be issuing an opinion on §922(g)(8).

The Fifth Circuit says that it does violate the Constitution, The state disagrees.

Do I want bad guys with violent tendencies running around with guns? No!

Will Rahimi get out of jail and be free to roam the streets with firearms if the Supreme Court rules in his favor?

No. He will not.

Mr. Rahimi is in jail for the things he did, outside possessing a firearm, while under a domestic-violence restraining order.

The federal count of §922(g)(8) was one of many counts brought against Mr. Rahimi. He is not getting out of jail anytime soon.

Mr. Carbajal-Flores is in the same situation. He is an illegal alien, in Chicago, doing bad things.

Mr. Carbajal-Flores entered the United States, illegally, in or before 2002. In June 2020, he was hanging around the front of a business when he claims he was handed a firearm by a 3rd party. The group of men loitering in front of the business claim to be an “impromptu neighborhood watch”.

He claims that he witnessed four vehicles drive past the business yelling threats and pointing guns at the “neighborhood watch”.

Then, at 2306, he pulled the gun and fired seven rounds at a car which he claimed had swerved to strike one of the members of the “watch”. At 2340, he pulled the gun again, fired repeatedly at a different vehicle, but the gun had malfunctioned and no rounds were actually fired.

Shortly after that, he was arrested by the police.

After arrest, he was found to be an illegal alien.

He was handed over to ICE. An indictment was issued via grand jury. The court issued a warrant for his arrest. He “self-surrendered”. Bail was set at $4,500 and he was released on house arrest. That was later modified to allow him to continue to go to work.

After Bruen issued, he filed a motion to dismiss on an as applied Second Amendment Challenge to §922(g)5.

When Judge Coleman issued her memorandum and order in December 2022, she faithfully followed [xCite item=”V5XRKILK” pos=0] which is Seventh Circuit court case law extending Second Amendment protections to illegal aliens as part of The People.

The Seventh Circuit then said that under means-end, the state could deny Second Amendment protected rights to illegal aliens.

Judge Coleman just followed along.

In 2024, she reheard the request for dismissal. Using text, history, and tradition, found that the Second Amendment did protect the rights of illegal aliens to possess arms, AS APPLIED TO MR. CARBAJAL-FLORES

This case was never about whether he was a member of “The People”. It was always about means-end balancing.

Regardless, Mr. Carbajal-Flores violated multiple statutes. Having a gun was the easy one to prove. They have video evidence of him shooting at a car. They have video evidence of him trying to shoot a different car. Both of those are crimes.

He should be in jail for attempted murder. I don’t care if he thought the car was swerving to strike somebody, at the time he was shooting, the car was already leaving.

After he gets out of jail for attempted murder, his ass should be deported.

§922(g) is an evil statute. It should be removed.

If you are not moral enough to be carrying arms, you are not moral enough to be free of incarceration.

If you are locked up, you still have the right to keep and bear arms. You are being denied that right.

Once you are released, you still have the right to keep and bear arms.

If the state things that after being released you should still be denied your rights, then they should have kept you incarcerated.

Off the sandbox.

THANK YOU to everybody who joined in yesterday’s discussion.

Well, we made it through another week. Nothing destroyed the world, as we know it.

During WWI, WWII, through the end of the draft, in America, there was a core of people called “conscientious objectors”. These were people who were unwilling to kill for any reason.

This became “the thing” to do when you wanted to avoid the draft during Vietnam. Most so-called conscientious objectors were culled during the interview process. The question asked were of the sort: Would you use violence to defend yourself? What would you do if your wife/girlfriend was being raped?

If you answered any of the questions with some sort of violence, you lost your conscientious objector status.

I consider myself to be a constitutional absolutist. The constitution means what it was understood by its plain text at the time it was adopted, with the amendments meaning what the plain text meant when the amendment was ratified.

Text, history, and tradition is the correct method to interpret The Constitution.

“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” This is the plain text of the Second Amendment.

I’ve always considered “The People” to include more than just citizens. The Bill of Rights does not mention citizens. It uses “the people”, “the accused”, “him”, “his”, “person”, “himself”, “owner”. These are terms that encompass more than just citizens.

So I am torn when I learn of a case where a bad person is found to be part of The People. I don’t want bad people to be a part of The People.

This leads to the following for me: It is possible for somebody to be a part of The People and have certain inalienable rights, and still be deported or incarcerated. When they are released, they should have access to their rights returned. If they are deported and return, they still have inalienable rights. We can incarcerate them or deport them again.

[yop_poll id=”1″]

Add your thoughts in the comments.