Tuesday, February 9, 2016

Daewoo K2/Max II Rifle


The Military Arms Channel did an excellent feature on the Daewoo K2/Max II rifle today. They showed both the pre-ban Max II and the post-ban DR-200. The latter had its ugly thumbhole stock replaced with a regular AR stock and the Stormworkz adapter.

The DR-200 was my first 5.56 semi-auto rifle. I bought it after the Clinton AWB. If I had been more on top of things - or had more money - I'd have gotten a pre-ban rifle. I still have mine in its original configuration. This is mainly because I haven't found time to switch out the trigger group to make it 922 compliant. The only downside to my DR-200 is the it has a 1-12 twist barrel which limits me to 55 grain or lighter ammo.




I did a blog post on the Daewoo back in the early days of this blog. It can be found here.


She Approves Of Dead Mexicans, Gun Running, And Murdered Federal LEOs


Hillary Clinton is one of the most shameless politicians of this era or any era. If an endorsement or ad will get her just one more vote, she'll go for it. It doesn't matter if the person making the endorsement was the most partisan, the most contemptible, the most brutally corrupt Attorney General since the founding of this Republic. A man whose fingerprints were all over an operation to run guns to Mexican cartels so as to build support for gun control. A man who was found in Contempt of Congress. A man who said he supported voting rights but dismissed charges of outright voter intimidation against favored groups. A man who used the Department of Justice as a shakedown machine against corporate America.

Of course, I'm referring to former Attorney General Eric Holder.

Living in western North Carolina, 3/4's of our broadcast TV comes from the Upstate of South Carolina. I was watching Jeopardy! last night when the ad below came on with Holder's endorsement of Hillary. The two themes pushed were gun control and voting rights. These are themes that play well with black voters and Hillary needs to lock down the black vote to stave off Bernie Sanders.




Who cares if the endorser and his minions were responsible, directly or indirectly, for the murders of two Federal law enforcement officers, the deaths of a minimum of 300 Mexican nationals, and the arming of Mexican drug cartels through smuggled guns?

Hillary doesn't. All she cares about is getting one more vote.


Monthly Gun Contests


Aaron at The Weapon Blog has released his monthly list of contests in which you can win guns, ammo, and other cool stuff. If you have other contests you'd like to share, go to his notification page and share it.

The top handgun listed, the S&W SW22 Victory I got to shoot at the SHOT Show. It is a sweet little .22LR pistol.

Thanks, Aaron!


Handguns
Rifles
Shotguns


  • American Tactical Cavalry Over/Under
    Deadline: February 29, 2016
    Added to list: February 8, 2016
    http://www.outdoors-jan.com/WebXpress-SpecialOffer.asp?ID=4DF16814-292D-45C4-BDE9-33E305773E32

  • Air Rifles

    • None this month
    Ammunition
    Knives
    Constitution
    Gun Rights Organizations
    • None this month
    Accessories
    Raffles
    Training
    Hunting
    • None this month

    Friday, February 5, 2016

    An Example Of Everytown's Campaign Against McAuliffe's Compromise


    Everytown Moms for Illegal Mayors is royally PO'ed that a governor that they thought they owned lock, stock, and barrel has now come to an agreement with pro-gun legislators and forces. Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D-VA) is, as I mentioned a couple of days ago, the focus of a social media campaign by Everytown in an effort to stop his agreement to reinstate and expand concealed carry reciprocity.



    Gun rights activists and supporters in Virginia need to keep up the pressure on both McAuliffe and their legislators to reinstate existing reciprocity agreements as well as to expand to universal reciprocity recognition.

    A Win In The 4th Circuit (Updated)


    The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals has not been too good for gun rights in the past few years. However, a case involving Maryland make signal a change. Kolbe v. Hogan (formerly Kolbe v. O'Malley) challenged Maryland's ban on certain semi-auto firearms and standard capacity on Second Amendment and Equal Protection Clause grounds. The District Court for Maryland agreed with the state's arguments and found the bans were constitutional using intermediate scrutiny.

    Today, the 4th Circuit overturned that decision in part and remanded it back to the District Court to be reconsidered using strict scrutiny. The court affirmed the District Court's dismissal of the Equal Protection claims involving retired law enforcement and the vagueness claims that "copies" of certain firearms were not specific enough.

    From the synopsis of the decision:
    TRAXLER, Chief Judge, wrote the opinion for the court as to Parts I, II, and III, in which Judge Agee joined.

    In April 2013, Maryland passed the Firearm Safety Act (“FSA”), which, among other things, bans law-abiding citizens, with the exception of retired law enforcement officers, from possessing the vast majority of semi-automatic rifles commonly kept by several million American citizens for defending their families and homes and other lawful purposes. Plaintiffs raise a number of challenges to the FSA, contending that the “assault weapons” ban trenches upon the core Second Amendment right to keep firearms in defense of hearth and home, that the FSA’s ban of certain larger-capacity detachable magazines (“LCMs”) likewise violates the Second Amendment, that the exception to the ban for retired officers violates the Equal Protection Clause, and that the FSA is void for vagueness to the extent that it prohibits possession of “copies” of the specifically identified semi-automatic rifles banned by the FSA. The district court rejected Plaintiffs’ Second Amendment challenges, concluding that the “assault weapons” and larger-capacity magazine bans passed constitutional muster under intermediate scrutiny review. The district court also denied Plaintiffs’ equal protection and vagueness claims.

    In our view, Maryland law implicates the core protection of the Second Amendment—“the right of law-abiding responsible citizens to use arms in defense of hearth and home,” District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 635 (2008), and we are compelled by Heller and McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010), as well as our own precedent in the wake of these decisions, to conclude that the burden is substantial and strict scrutiny is the applicable standard of review for Plaintiffs’ Second Amendment claim. Thus, the panel vacates the district court’s denial of Plaintiffs’ Second Amendment claims and remands for the district court to apply strict scrutiny. The panel affirms the district court’s denial of Plaintiffs’ Equal Protection challenge to the statutory exception allowing retired law enforcement officers to possess prohibited semi-automatic rifles. And, the panel affirms the district court’s conclusion that the term “copies” as used by the FSA is not unconstitutionally vague.
     The decision from the 4th Circuit was not unanimous and contains dissents, concurrences, and multiple parts. Indeed, the full decision is 90 pages long. Needless to say, it will take some time to read and digest this decision. That said, having the case sent back to the District Court to apply strict scrutiny to the Second Amendment claims is a definite win.

    It will be interesting to see what legal legerdemain that Judge Catherine C. Blake will employ to assert that Maryland can still ban the most popular firearm in common use in America today even if strict scrutiny is applied.

    UPDATE: Sebastian has more on this case at Shall Not Be Questioned. He is correct in saying that the ban on semi-auto rifles and standard capacity magazines still remains in place. The 4th Circuit didn't find the law unconstitutional. It merely said that it needs to be reheard using the correct level of scrutiny. This is a win but not a complete win.

    UPDATE II: Attorney Andrew Branca (Law of Self Defense) has his take on the case here.

    UPDATE III: Gun rights scholar and attorney David Kopel examines the case in detail in the Washington Post's Volokh Conspiracy blog. As he notes, the Second Amendment protections should extend to gun parts (magazines) and that strict scrutiny is appropriate in this case.

    UPDATE IV: Dave Hardy weighs in on Kolbe. He makes note of the dissent and the response from Judge Traxler to it.

    Maryland AG Reacts As Expected


    Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh (D-MD) served a combined 28 years in the Maryland House and Senate before being elected Attorney General. He says in his bio that, "He shepherded landmark legislation on gun safety", through the Maryland Senate. That legislation was the Maryland Firearm Safety Act which banned the sale of ARs. AKs, their clones, and standard capacity magazines.

    Given that background, it is no surprise that he is not happy with the judges of the 4th Circuit after yesterday's ruling in Kolbe v. Hogan. As he states in the press release below, he intends to request an en banc review of the case or, failing to get that, he will appeal the case to the Supreme Court.
    Baltimore, MD (Feb. 4, 2016) --Attorney General Brian E. Frosh issued the following statement on today's ruling by the U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals on the Maryland Firearm Safety Act:

    "The Maryland Firearm Safety Act is a common-sense law designed to reduce gun violence and make our communities safer. It remains the law in Maryland.

    The 2-1 decision handed down today by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals returns the case to the district court for further proceedings, and it also conflicts sharply with rulings of other federal appellate courts.

    Those courts have uniformly upheld assault weapons bans and limits on large capacity magazines. Those courts have not imposed the standard of review adopted by the 2-judge majority today, but instead follow a standard that gives greater deference to the public safety and health concerns that led the legislature to enact this law. As a dissent by Judge King notes: 'There is sound reason to conclude that the Second Amendment affords no protection whatsoever to the assault rifles and shotguns, copycat weapons, and large-capacity detachable magazines that are banned by the State of Maryland.'

    As Attorney General, I remain fully committed to defending Maryland's law, and to defending the courageous votes taken by the Maryland General Assembly so that we can continue to protect public safety and reduce the risk of deadly gun violence.

    Rest assured, the Office of the Attorney General will seek further review of the majority decision, either by the full Fourth Circuit sitting en banc, or by the U.S. Supreme Court."
    Those other circuits to whom he refers are the notoriously anti-gun 1st, 2nd, and 3rd. As a resident of the 4th Circuit I have been consistently disappointed in its rulings on the Second Amendment. I have long wished that they would start ruling more like the 7th Circuit but my wishes have not been granted. Starting with US v Masciandaro (2011) and continuing with their overturning of the District Court win in Woollard v. Gallagher (2013), the 4th Circuit has not sure much due respect for Second Amendment rights.

    Of note is that dissent in Kolbe came from Judge Robert King, a Clinton appointee, who wrote the opinion in the Woollard case. You'd have thought a born, bred, and educated West (by God!) Virginian would have had more respect for the Second Amendment. Sadly, that is not the case.

    Thursday, February 4, 2016

    NSSF Responds To The 4th Circuit Ruling


    The National Shooting Sports Foundation was an organizational plaintiff in Kolbe v. Hogan. As you can imagine they are very pleased with the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals' ruling that the District Court erred in going with intermediate scrutiny and not strict scrutiny.
    Appeals Court Remands Decision for ‘Strict Scrutiny’ of Second Amendment

    NEWTOWN, Conn. — The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit today overturned a federal district court decision that had upheld the 2013 State of Maryland Firearm Safety Act as constitutional under intermediate scrutiny review.

    Writing for the three-judge appellate court panel that heard the case, Kolbe v. Maryland, Chief Judge William B. Traxler wrote: “In our view, Maryland law implicates the core protection of the Second Amendment — ‘the right of law-abiding responsible citizens to use arms in defense of hearth and home, District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570,635 (2008), and we are compelled by Heller and McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010), as well as our own precedent in the wake of these decisions to conclude that the burden is substantial and strict scrutiny is the applicable standard or review for Plaintiffs’ Second Amendment claim.”

    The court vacated the district court’s denial of the plaintiffs’ claims and remanded the case to the lower court, ordering that it apply the appropriate strict standard of review.

    “We are greatly heartened by the Fourth Circuit panel’s ruling today,” said Lawrence G. Keane, Senior Vice President and General Counsel, National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), one of the lead plaintiffs in this case. “As this important case goes forward, NSSF will continue to work with our co-plaintiffs to ensure that our citizens’ Second Amendment rights are protected and that the lawful commerce in firearms is restored in support of this constitutional protection.”

    The NRA Responds To Today's 4th Circuit Decision


    The NRA is very pleased with the 2-1 ruling in the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals in the case of Kolbe v. Hogan.
    National Rifle Association Statement on 4th Circuit Court of Appeals Ruling in Kolbe v. Maryland

    Fairfax, Va.— Chris W. Cox, the executive director of the National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative Action, issued the following statement in reaction to today's ruling by the federal 4th Circuit Court of Appeals in the Kolbe v. Maryland case. The case challenges the legality of Maryland’s 2013 ban on so-called assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. The 2-1 decision sends the gun-control law back to a lower court for review because it “implicates the core protection of the Second Amendment.”

    "The Fourth Circuit’s ruling is an important victory for the Second Amendment. Maryland's ban on commonly owned firearms and magazines clearly violates our fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms for self-defense. The highest level of judicial scrutiny should apply when governments try to restrict our Second Amendment freedoms." - Chris W. Cox, executive director of the NRA's Institute for Legislative Action
    You can find my earlier post on the case here.