|
|
GA: Charges dropped for Fort Valley man in 2025 fatal shooting due to insufficient evidence
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The Macon Judicial Circuit said that the GBI is continuing to investigate, and while a suspect, Clark, was identified, Clark has indicated that he was acting in self-defense after he was first attacked by McMillan.
It is reported that witnesses gave conflicting statements; some said McMillan was armed, while others said he was not.
"Under Georgia law, when a defendant raises a self-defense justification, the state is required to prove the defendant did not act in self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt. Without additional credible evidence, the state is unable to meet this legal requirement," Said the Macon Judicial Circuit. |
DC: Calif. man arrested near U.S. Capitol for having a GUILLOTINE says it was for ‘self-defense’
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
As the nation’s capital, Washington, D.C., draws a lot of strange characters, and we’re not talking about those who occupy office, many of whom are in a category all to themselves.
On Tuesday, a man was arrested for driving with a guillotine in the back of his pickup truck — the charge was “Carrying a Dangerous Weapon.”
Philan-Tam-Duy Le of Julian, CA, was arrested near the U.S. Capitol, and when asked by police officers if the guillotine was functional, Le assured them that it was “the real deal,” according to U.S. Capitol Police. |
SAF Files Opening Brief With Supreme Court In ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban Lawsuit
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Following closely on the heels of celebrating its 52nd anniversary, the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and its partners have filed their opening brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in cases challenging assault weapons bans in Cook County, Illinois and Connecticut.
On June 30, the Supreme Court agreed to hear two SAF cases – Viramontes v. Cook County and Grant v. Higgins – challenging the prohibitions of many commonly owned rifles, including the ubiquitous AR-15, in Cook County, Ill., and Connecticut. While legal and broadly adopted by Americans all over the country for a litany of lawful purposes – including self-defense – a minority of states have sought to outright ban the possession of these types of firearms. |
NM: Federal Court Rules on New Mexico’s Seven-Day Waiting Period
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Yesterday, Judge Browning issued a final judgment in the case. Although the judge stated that he continued to believe that the waiting period law was constitutional, he acknowledged that he was “bound by the Tenth Circuit’s decision and the law of the case.” As a result, he permanently prohibited New Mexico from enforcing the waiting-period law against Ortega and Scott.
So, while this ruling provides a total victory for our clients, it appears to leave millions of other law-abiding New Mexicans seemingly still subject to the same seven-day waiting period.
For that reason, MSLF strongly disagrees with the court’s watered-down ruling. |
NM: New Mexico Loses 7-Day Gun Waiting Period Case—Still Enforces It Against Most Buyers
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The ruling is a clear Second Amendment victory. It is not, however, a statewide injunction.
Browning’s order immediately prohibits the governor, attorney general, state employees, law-enforcement officers and anyone acting with them from enforcing New Mexico’s Waiting Period Act against Ortega and Scott. It does not extend that protection to other New Mexico residents.
The state’s seven-day waiting period therefore remains in effect for ordinary gun buyers unless they fall under one of the law’s exemptions. |
MS: Guns Sales Tax Holiday kicks off in Mississippi
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Friday kicked off the 2026 Second Amendment Sales Tax Holiday.
During this period, state sales tax is waived on the sale of certain guns, ammunition, archery equipment, hunting supplies, etc.
This is the first time gun safes are included in items that apply to the Sales Tax Holiday.
Dead Eye Arms and Ammo is a gun store on Highway 80 in Pearl.
William Marler was looking to take advantage of the no sales tax days. |
MO: GOP AG fires back at pro-2A attacks for allegedly going soft on stand your ground law
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Hanaway came under fire from BearingArms.com columnist Tom Knighton for her remarks.
“While I want to see criminals locked up and locked up for a long time, I’m fine with not making the prosecution’s life easier on defensive gun uses,” Knighton wrote. “I don’t want them playing Monday morning quarterback because someone figured out that someone might feasibly squeeze through a fence and escape in the cold light of day as opposed to the night before, when adrenaline is pumping through their veins instead of actual blood.”
“If Hanaway won’t stand up for Stand Your Ground, she needs to find a new job. That seems clear, and she can take Johnson with her,” Knighton continued. |
The Op-Ed That Argued Itself Into the 2A Camp
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
A student writer at Virginia Commonwealth University set out to argue for repealing the Second Amendment. Along the way, he explained precisely why it exists.
That is the strange thing about the op-ed published in The Commonwealth Times, VCU’s student paper. The author, contributing writer Zachary Roman, owns an AR-15 pistol. He says he intends to keep it right up until the day the Second Amendment is repealed. And he wants that repeal to happen. Read the piece closely, and you find a young man holding a rifle for exactly the reason the founders wrote the amendment in the first place, while asking the government to strip away everyone’s ability to do the same. |
ME: Supreme Court Mulling Whether To Hear Case Against Maine’s Waiting-Period Law
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The Supreme Court is considering whether to take up a case challenging a three-day waiting period imposed by Maine on firearms purchases.
Maine’s waiting period took effect in 2024 when Democratic Gov. Janet Mills refused to veto the legislation, instead allowing it to become law without her signature. After United States District Judge Lance E. Walker of the District of New Mexico, a Trump appointee, ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit overturned the decision, prompting the petition to the Supreme Court. |
WA: WA State Patrol Begins Accepting Applications for ‘Training Providers’
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The Washington State Patrol (WSP) is now accepting applications for “certified firearm safety training providers” who will be offering mandated gun safety courses for Evergreen State residents who want to obtain a “permit-to-purchase” a gun or obtain/renew their concealed pistol license beginning May 1, 2027.
The law is almost certain to be challenged in court on constitutional grounds. Democrats controlling the legislature passed House Bill 1163 last year, without a single Republican voting for the legislation. |
GA: Decatur Library shooting suspect granted immunity, case dismissed
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The DeKalb County district attorney’s office has shed more light on a judge’s decision to dismiss the case against a man who shot another man after an argument at the Decatur Library.
Medicus Brown, 44, faced charges of aggravated battery, aggravated assault and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony after authorities said he shot Frederick Mitchell in the eye Feb. 2. Court records show his attorney, public defender Kyle Obiora, filed a motion for immunity from prosecution May 8, arguing Brown was acting in self-defense.
On Aug. 7, DeKalb County Superior Court Judge Shondeana C. Morris granted the motion and dismissed the case. |
CDC restores study acknowledging self-defense gun use buried during Biden era
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) restored information regarding studies of the use of firearms for self-defense on its website, reversing a move made during the Biden administration.
CDC took down information about the studies during the Biden administration after a lobbying campaign by anti-Second Amendment groups backed by Democratic Illinois Sen. Richard Durbin, according to emails obtained by The Reload. The restoration of the studies to the CDC site prompted criticism from anti-Second Amendment advocates. |
FL: Florida Homeowner Shoots Intruder During Forced Residential Break-In
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
A dangerous forced entry attempt ended safely for a local resident after an alert homeowner accessed a personal firearm and confronted an intruder attempting to breach his home during late evening hours.
According to local police reports, the encounter began when the homeowner heard aggressive physical impacts against an exterior door. Observing an unfamiliar suspect attempting to force open the deadbolt latch, the resident immediately retrieved a defensive firearm from a quick access safe. |
AR-15s at the Supreme Court: The Second Amendment’s Next Test
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The Second Amendment revival of the last 15 years has not yet answered a question that affects at least 1 in every 20 American adults: do Americans have a constitutional right to possess AR-15-style semiautomatic rifles? The Supreme Court will finally answer that question this term in Viramontes v. Cook County.
Professor Joel Alicea – who is part of the litigation team taking Viramontes to the Supreme Court! – joins hosts Ilan Wurman and Joshua Kleinfeld to break down the issues.
Joel, Josh, and Ilan trace the development of Second Amendment doctrine from Heller to the present and dig into the case’s real fault line: Does the Second Amendment contain an exception for “dangerous and unusual weapons”... |
NM: Federal judge rules against New Mexico’s 7-day waiting period for gun purchases
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
A federal judge on Thursday ruled against a 2024 New Mexico law that imposed a seven-day waiting period for gun purchases, but a spokesperson for Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham told Source NM on Friday that her office will almost certainly appeal the ruling.
Citing a sharp uptick in gun violence, the Legislature approved House Bill 129 during the 2024 legislative session, and Lujan Grisham signed it soon afterward. The law imposes a “cooling off” period of a week for gun purchases, except for law enforcement, those with concealed carry permits and those who sell guns to immediate family members. |
FPC Asks U.S. Supreme Court To End “Assault Weapon” Bans Nationwide In Landmark Second Amendment Case
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced today that its legal team has filed its merits brief with the United States Supreme Court in Viramontes v. Cook County, asking the Court to hold that bans on so-called “assault weapons” are unconstitutional and that semiautomatic rifles are protected by the Second Amendment.
“This is one of the most important Second Amendment cases in American history,” said FPC President Brandon Combs. “The question is simple: Can the government ban some of the most popular firearms in America? The Constitution says no. Supreme Court precedent says no. And the en banc Third Circuit recently said no in our landmark Cheeseman v. Davenport win. Now we are asking the Supreme Court to say so for the entire country.” |
ME: Battle over Maine’s 72-hour gun waiting period law could head to US Supreme Court
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
A controversial gun control law in Maine could end up at the country’s highest court. Attorneys representing gun rights groups are asking the U.S. Supreme Court to decide if Maine’s 72-hour waiting period to buy a gun is unconstitutional.
The firm, Clement & Murphy, PLLC, filed a petition for writ of certiorari, which basically asks the court to review a lower court’s ruling on the case. For this filing, petitioners are asking the Supreme Court to review the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit’s prior ruling that said the law was likely constitutional.
“We will take this just as far as we have to,” said Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine Executive Director David Trahan. “We said we would follow it through to the end, and we will.” |
Anti-Second Amendment ‘Expert’ Is Still Grousing About Bruen Ruling 4 Years Later
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Many TTAG readers were well acquainted with Adam Winkler, proclaimed by gun-ban advocates as a Second Amendment expert, but who is really an anti-Second Amendment expert.
Winkler is the Connell Professor of Law at UCLA Law School and widely touted by those on the anti-gun side of the Second Amendment debate. Now, he’s back in the news, still whining about the 2022 ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which he claims has been instrumental in the U.S. Supreme Court making “a mess” out of gun laws. |
Supreme Court AR-15 Brief Defends Militia Arms—Then Abandons Machine Guns
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
After explaining why United States v. Miller protects arms with a reasonable relationship to militia efficiency, the brief declares that the “general consensus” is that automatic weapons are not protected. It then argues that semiautomatic rifles fall within the Second Amendment because they fire one round per trigger pull and are therefore legally and mechanically distinguishable from machine guns.
That may be a convenient litigation strategy, but it is not a faithful application of the constitutional principle Edelsohn has just defended. |
Gun Rights Group Takes Fight Over Assault Weapons Bans To Supreme Court
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The Second Amendment Foundation and its litigation partners have submitted their opening brief to the U.S. Supreme Court, officially kicking off arguments in a pair of major challenges targeting local and state assault weapons bans.
The legal action follows the high court’s decision on June 30 to grant review in two separate lawsuits: Viramontes v. Cook County, arising from Illinois, and Grant v. Higgins, which challenges state-level statutes in Connecticut. Both cases contest regulatory restrictions that prohibit the sale and possession of certain semiautomatic long guns, including the widely distributed AR-15 platform. |
PA: Swing-State Lawmaker Wants To Remove State’s Red Tape From Suppressors
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: www.marktaff.com
|
There
are no comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
“...Pennsylvania, like several other states, independently regulates certain firearms and related items as ‘prohibited offensive weapons’ under Title 18,” Kauffman wrote. “At the same time, current Pennsylvania law provides an affirmative defense when an individual can establish, by a preponderance of the evidence, that they complied with applicable NFA requirements.”
“Consequently, the availability of a defense under Pennsylvania law may depend upon compliance with federal requirements that a court has now declared unconstitutional and enjoined from enforcement against certain individuals,” Kauffman continued. |
|
|
