NY Judge: The Second Amendment Doesn’t Exist Here

There’s been a case in New York that I should have been following more closely. Dexter Taylor was a hobby gunsmith. He liked the nature of putting together guns from lawfully purchased parts.

However, the state of New York disapproved of this pastime. They arrested Taylor and, on Monday, he was convicted.

My friend Jeff Charles over at our sister site RedState has been covering this case pretty much from the jump, and in his story from Monday about the sentencing, there was something we had to talk about.

You see, the judge in the case has decided that a certain right of interest to Bearing Arms readers doesn’t actually exist in her state.

From the beginning of Taylor’s trial, it was evident that the court would be biased against the defendant, according to [Taylor’s attorney, Vinoo] Varghese, who explained that two judges presided over his case before the current official, Judge Abena Darkeh, took over.

The judge disrupted Varghese’s opening statement multiple times as he tried to set the stage for Taylor’s defense. Even further, she admonished the defense to refrain from mentioning the Second Amendment during the trial. Varghese told RedState:

She told us, ‘Do not bring the Second Amendment into this courtroom. It doesn’t exist here. So you can’t argue Second Amendment. This is New York.’

Varghese said he had filed the appropriate paperwork to “preserve these arguments for appeal” but that the judge “rejected these arguments, and she went out of her way to limit me.”

The Second Amendment doesn’t exist there? Excuse the hell out of me?

“This is New York?”

This just smacks of “the Aloha spirit” nonsense where some parties seem to think that the Constitution doesn’t actually apply because they really, really don’t like it.

Is the judge in this case, Judge Abena Darkeh, suggesting that the Second Amendment doesn’t apply anywhere she doesn’t approve? What other rights don’t exist in New York under Judge Darkeh’s paradigm? Do defendants not have the right to representation? Is free speech non-existent?

Oh, one might make the case that I’m being ridiculous, but I don’t think I am. Not based on Darkeh’s other actions.

Varghese also tries to take a jury nullification approach. Jury nullification basically means you convince the jury that while a crime might have occurred, the law in question is the real problem. It’s rare, but it’s still a thing. Judges aren’t supposed to encourage it, but they’re not supposed to stop it.

Yet Judge Darkeh did just that. She reportedly warned jurors in such a way as to suggest they could face consequences if they didn’t vote to convict.

So, basically, it feels like Taylor got railroaded and that Darkeh doesn’t actually think people have rights unless she, personally, approves of them.

Yet that’s not how rights work. They exist even if they’re inconvenient. They exist even if you don’t approve of how they’re used.

Varghese says he tried to preserve Darkeh’s comments for appeal and was stymied. However, her comments should still be on the record somewhere. If not, her attitude should be clear from the transcripts.

But either way, Darkeh makes it clear that at least some jurists in New York really don’t think the Second Amendment applies in either their courtroom or the state as a whole.

It’s time they’re disabused of that notion by higher courts.

SCOTUS Grants Cert in SAF VanDerStok Frames, Receivers ‘Finale Rule’ Case

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday granted certiorari in the case of the “Finale Rule” on frames, receivers and parts kits announced by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives in April 2022, and subsequently challenged by several entities including the Second Amendment Foundation.

The case is known as Garland v. VanDerStok. It has been described as a case about so-called “ghost guns” built without serial numbers, but the issue is far deeper. It is really about the ATF’s alleged violation of the Administrative Procedures Act (APA), and usurping the authority of Congress.

In a statement from SAF, Executive Director Adam Kraut hailed the announcement.

“We are delighted that the Court has agreed to hear our challenge to ATF’s frames and receivers Final Rule,” Kraut said. “ATF has continuously exceeded its constitutional authority and violated the separation of powers by creating law – a job reserved exclusively for Congress. It is time for the Supreme Court to remind ATF that it may not do so and affirm the judgment of the Fifth Circuit.”

SAF was joined in its intervenor complaint by Defense Distributed, a Texas-based firm. In their original complaint, they stated, “To comply with the Second Amendment,” the complaint alleged, “the promulgating agencies needed to jettison balancing tests and consider only whether their regulation is ‘consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.’ Yet because that did not happen—itself a key APA violation—it is no surprise that the new Final Rule tramples true historical traditions.”

The Associated Press is reporting that arguments in the case “won’t take place before fall.” That could push a ruling back to possibly June of 2025.

According to SCOTUS Blog, “A federal district judge in Texas invalidated the rule and entered a national injunction against it. By a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court then stayed the order pending resolution of an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit and any cert. petition; Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh voted to deny the stay.”

For more than a half-century, since passage of the Gun Control Act of 1968, the ATF did not consider parts kits or unfinished frames and/or receivers to be firearms. But that changed 15 months into the Biden administration.

“This case typifies the Biden administration’s war on the Second Amendment,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb. “Clearly under Joe Biden, the ATF has unilaterally set itself up as the sole authority on firearms regulation, bypassing Congress and arbitrarily changing long-standing regulations to suit the administration’s anti-gun agenda.”

As noted by NBC News, after the high court granted the stay while the trial moved forward, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals “mostly ruled for the challengers.”

“Because Congress has neither authorized the expansion of firearm regulation nor permitted the criminalization of previously lawful conduct, the proposed rule constitutes unlawful agency action, in direct contravention of the legislature’s will,” the Circuit Court ruled.

The Biden administration does not want to lose this case, which is not actually a Second Amendment case, but has considerable bearing on how far the government can go to regulate firearms without violating the right to keep and bear arms.

Today, my Dad, already ‘The Elder’ of the clan, as the oldest living, becomes the oldest ever lived, as he surpasses the age of his older brother who passed in February of 2021, a little less than 5 months before his centenary birthday.
Yes, Dad is “Ninety and Nine”, and in September will celebrate his 100th birthday, having proclaimed on more than one occasion that he plans on casting his vote in the 2024 federal election.

Nashville homeowner shoots burglar in self-defense
The burglar was shot after he allegedly broke the kitchen window and was trying to enter the home.

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (WSMV) – Police said a burglary suspect was shot in self-defense by the homeowner in the Trinity Hills area on Saturday morning.

Anton Cosby, 32, is accused of breaking into the home on Shreeve Lane just before 6 a.m. Saturday. The victim and his family woke up to the sound of banging on the front door and windows.

The homeowner retrieved his firearm and gave Cosby repeated commands to leave. He told Cosby he would fire his weapon, according to police. Cosby then allegedly broke the kitchen window and began to climb through when the homeowner shot him once in the arm.

Police said Cosby dropped his revolver near the kitchen sink and ran away. Officers say they found him nearby. When they attempted to render aid, Cosby became combative. He was transported to Skyline Medical Center for treatment of his non-critical gunshot wound.

According to police, the District Attorney’s office has determined the victim was acting in self-defense and is not expected to face charges for the shooting.

Cosby will be charged with aggravated burglary, felony vandalism, possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony and possession of a firearm while intoxicated when he is released from the hospital.

VIRGINIA VETO SESSION HIGHLIGHTS NEED FOR GOVERNORS WHO RESPECT THE SECOND AMENDMENT

Virginia’s General Assembly gathered in Richmond for the Reconvened Regular Session (or Veto Session). This is the one-day session when bills the governor either vetoed or sent back to the legislature with amendments can be taken back up. This veto session is more significant than usual for the firearm industry because Democrats, who currently control both the Senate and House of Delegates, passed dozens of antigun bills. They were on a mission to pass bills to strip away the Second Amendment rights of Virginians and punish the firearm industry. With much appreciation, Gov. Glenn Youngkin responded by vetoing all legislation that would have negatively impacted firearm and ammunition businesses.

Here’s a look at some of the defeated bills Democrats passed and were sent back to the General Assembly by Gov. Youngkin. The General Assembly was unable to override any of the governor’s vetoes.

SB 2 & HB 2 would ban the sale of many semiautomatic firearms classified as so-called “assault firearms.” The legislation would also ban standard capacity magazines, or those having a capacity of more than 10 rounds. NSSF’s recently-released research report conservatively estimates over 717 million such magazines produced since 1990, establishing beyond question they are commonly owned by law-abiding Americans.

SB 273 & HB 1195 would create an arbitrary and unconstitutional five-day waiting period for the purchase and transfer of firearms.

SB 327 would remove the right of young adults (18 to 20 years of age) to purchase certain semiautomatic rifles and shotguns. NSSF refers to this as an unconstitutional age-based gun ban.

SB 491 & HB 318 would create new civil liabilities for firearm industry members, specifically those engaged in the sale, manufacturing, distribution, importation or marketing of firearm-related products. These bills would also create a civil cause of action for the attorney general or local county or city attorney to enforce the provisions of the legislation. Such claims are preempted by the bipartisan Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA).

HB 351 would prohibit the transfer of a firearm from a licensed dealer unless the transferee purchases a locking device for the firearm if they reside in the same household as a child or complete a certification statement that they do not reside in the same household as a child. This bill disregards the fact that free locking devices are included in the package with every firearm shipped from a manufacturer and federal law already requires licensed dealers have such devices available for sale and must provide one when transferring a handgun.

HB 585 would implement statewide zoning restrictions that ban home-based licensed dealers from operating within 1.5 miles of an elementary or middle school. This bill would put many licensed dealers out of business.

HB 1174 would expand the definition of “assault firearms” while also unconstitutionally banning the sale of many Modern Sporting Rifles (MSRs) and those that would have been newly-designated as “assault firearm” to those under 21 years of age. The bill would have also codified into state law the minimum age to purchase a handgun as 21. That has come under scrutiny after a federal judge in Virginia ruled adults under 21 cannot be prohibited from purchasing a handgun.

To summarize, Democrats attempted to ban commonly-owned firearms and magazines, create new civil liabilities that would be weaponized against manufacturers and dealers, strip young adults of their rights, create unnecessary red tape to purchase a firearm and close responsible home-based businesses simply because they happen to be within an arbitrary distance of a school.

Democrats did not have the votes to override any of the governor’s industry-supported vetoes. NSSF thanks Gov. Youngkin and those legislators that stood up for the thousands of Virginians in the firearm industry and the millions of gun-owning Virginians it serves. NSSF will continue to actively engage here in Richmond. That doesn’t mean the work is done. Undoubtedly, many of these same bills, and some new ones, will be introduced next year.

Do you hate yourself, your life, and everything around you? Thinking about shooting up a school? School shootings are so last year. Self-Immolation is the new hotness.

Don’t shoot and be lame
Be awesome and in flame

Image

Police Website Reveals CDC Suppressing Defensive Gun Use Data

According to a report from Law Enforcement Today, recent revelations have exposed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for allegedly suppressing data on defensive gun use (DGU). This action has ignited debates over the transparency and potential politicization of the agency’s research on gun policy and public health.

The CDC, which studies various factors contributing to injury and mortality including firearm incidents, has been criticized for omitting defensive gun use statistics from its public communications. Despite commissioning a study from The National Academies’ Institute of Medicine and National Research Council, which recognized DGUs as a “common occurrence,” the CDC chose to exclude these statistics following pressure from gun-control advocates.

Documents obtained via Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests revealed that individuals such as Mark Bryant of the Gun Violence Archive, Devin Hughes of GVPedia, and Po Murray engaged with top CDC officials. They were introduced by the White House and Senator Dick Durbin’s office and pressed the CDC to downplay DGU frequencies, which range from estimates of 60,000 to 2.5 million annually in the U.S.

Mark Bryant was particularly outspoken, vehemently opposing the highest estimates of DGU. He was quoted in correspondence saying, “that statistic needs to be killed, buried, dug up, killed again and buried again. It is highly misleading, used out of context, and holds zero value even as an outlier in honest discussions surrounding DGUs.”

Despite initial reluctance, the CDC ultimately removed references to DGUs from its publications, a move that has been perceived as aligning the agency more with gun-control advocacy groups than with unbiased scientific inquiry. This has raised concerns about the CDC’s commitment to providing comprehensive and unbiased data.

Gary Kleck, professor emeritus at Florida State University’s College of Criminology and Criminal Justice and a long-time researcher of DGUs, criticized the CDC’s actions, suggesting they indicate the agency is a tool of gun-control advocates rather than a neutral body. Kleck, whose research supports at least 760,000 DGUs annually, emphasized the importance of rigorous methodology and empirical evidence in academic research.

This situation highlights the ongoing tension between scientific research and political influence, particularly in the contentious arena of gun policy. Critics argue that the CDC’s actions compromise its credibility as an evidence-based institution and call for greater transparency and accountability in its research practices.

“CDC is just aligning itself with the gun-control advocacy groups. It’s just saying: ‘we are their tool, and we will do their bidding.’ And that’s not what a government agency should do,” Kleck told Eddie Killian, the author of the Law Enforcement Today article.

Maryland homeowner opens fire after finding 2 men had broken in

ASPEN HILL, Md. — A homeowner in an Aspen Hill neighborhood shot at two burglars early Thursday. Police say one person has been taken into custody.

Montgomery County Police Department officers were called to the 3200 block of Weeping Willow Court for a report of a burglary around 3 a.m. Investigators learned that two men entered a home in the area. The homeowner discovered the two men inside, and fired a round from a firearm, police said. No one was shot, and one of the burglars is in custody.

Police have not offered any lookout information for the second burglar in this case. The investigation is active and ongoing. Since the investigation is still in its early stages, additional information has not yet been made public. As we learn more, we will update this story.