CLAIM: Supreme Court Is Giving GUNS to DOMESTIC ABUSERS!!!!!

The Federal case of US v. Rahimi, working its way to the Supreme Court involves the question of whether a presumptively law-abiding American citizen can be denied their Second Amendment rights when constrained by a domestic violence restraining order, in the absence of any finding of dangerous on behalf of the person constrained by the order.

Although gun control propagandists will argue that Rahimi is about giving guns to domestic abusers, in fact Second Amendment advocates readily agree Second Amendment rights can be denied to people demonstrated to be dangerous.

It is the absence of any showing of dangerous that is key to Rahimi.

Today's show is a reading of a recent 3-judge panel decision out of the 5th Circuit finding that the deprivation of Second Amendment rights as a consequence of a civil domestic violence restraining order in the absence of a showing of dangerous is an unconstitutional infringement of the Second Amendment.

Rahimi is now heading to the Supreme Court for further argument.

Tomorrow's show, incidentally, will be my reading of an amici curiae authored by Second Amendment law giant Attorney David Kopel, and friend of the Law of Self Defense community, Attorney Konsta Moros. In this amici curiae Kopel and Moros present powerful legal argument in support of the 5th Circuit decision being read today.

Enjoy the show!

THERE IS ONLY ONE SELF-DEFENSE "INSURANCE" PROVIDER I TRUST!
There are lots of self-defense "insurance" companies out there. Some are hot garbage. Some have limited resources. Some are simply, in my view, untrustworthy. But there is ONE that I PERSONALLY TRUST to protect myself and my family.
LEARN which ONE I TRUST by clicking HERE:
https://lawofselfdefense.com/trust

You have a GUN so you're hard to KILL--know the LAW so you're hard to CONVICT.
https://lawofselfdefense.com/

Disclaimer - Content is for educational & entertainment purposes only, and does not constitute legal advice.

Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.