They Think If They Ignore Bruen, It Will Just Go Away

Ever since the NYSRPA vs. Bruen Supreme Court ruling, corrupt, Constitutionally dyslexic lower court judges and many elected officials (Republicans included!) have consistently ignored the 'Text and History' standard set forth therein, and refer to corrupt legal precedents for guidance on 2nd Amendment issues.

SHOOTINGCLASSES.COM
Online business operations platform for firearms instructors, trainees, and Shooting Ranges

Glover Orndorf and Flanagan Wealth Mgmt.
Wealth management services

Control Jiu-Jitsu/MMA
Jiu-Jitsu/MMA Training in Melbourne, FL

Freedom Guns
Firearms, Ammunition, Accessories, Training classes

The Gun Site
9-Lane 25 yard indoor Shooting Range, Gun Store, Training classes

WJS Guns
Gun and Outdoor Shop, ammo, accessories, fishing tackle, more

Sicarios Gun Shop
Firearms, Accessories, Ammo, Safes, and more!

The American Police Hall of Fame
Museum and Shooting Center (open to public), Law Enforcement and Civilian Training

Counter Strike Tactical
Best Little Gun Store in Melbourne, Florida! Veteran Owned and Operated 321-499-4949

Go2 Weapons
Manufacturers of AR platform rifles for military and civilian. Veteran Owned and Operated

Ear Care of Melbourne
Need hearing aids? Go to the audiologists that gave Royce his hearing back!

Quantified Performance
Quantified Performance, LLC is focused on building safe, high performing keepers and bearers.

Disclaimer: This post contains affiliate links. If you make a purchase, I may receive a commission at no extra cost to you.

Transcript

OPENING COMMERCIAL: Life has a way of throwing unforeseen events and new opportunities our way at Glover, Orndorf and Flanagan wealth management They are dedicated to putting your interests first with a truly personalized approach They are there to bring confidence to your
investment planning choices whether you need income production for retirement 401k guidance Long -term investments or other financial planning needs They'll focus on the establishment of a plan tailored to your life's priorities. For more information, call Bill Orndorf is partner with Glover, Orndorf and Flanagan wealth management today at 321 -344 -1202. 321 -344 -1202.
Investment products and services are offered through Wells Fargo Advisors Financial
Network, LLC. Member SIPC. Glover Orndorf and Flanagan, LLC is a separate entity
from Wells Fargo Advisors Financial Network.

COMMERCIAL: The Police Hall of Fame and the United States Law Enforcement Foundation, where bold
vision and hope align to create a better tomorrow for all law enforcement and the
communities they serve by strong advocacy, hard and soft skills training and
education, and their many programs of compassion. To learn more, please
dot o -r -g or a -p -h -f dot o -r -g

OPENING THEME MUSIC: 

Turn it on, tune in, crank it up!! Locked and loaded on the Shooting Straight Show!

Turn it on! Tune in! Let's go! Royce Bartlett is the keeper and bearer of truth, we know!

Only the facts about the second amendment (Royceover) And never ever forget that all gun control
laws are nothing less than overt acts of aggression against the American people and their rights"

Exercise your rights in a safe way (Royceover) It's stupidity to think that someone hell-bent on violating the law against murder will magically be stopped by a gun control law

"Politicians that infringe on our God -given rights He calls them out,
he's not here to play So turn it on tune in, crank it up
♪ Royce Bartlett and the shooting straight show ♪ ♪ Let's go,
let's go ♪ - 

- Yes, indeed, let's go. We're locked, loaded, and loud. Welcome to the shooting
straight radio podcast. This is all about firearms, the second amendment,
and all things pertaining thereto. I am Royce your cute cuddly,
huggable, lovable, squeezable host? Yep, I'm still saturated with gunshot residue,
toxic masculinity, and a faint yet old so wildly tantalizing whiff of the cologne of
my people. Hops number nine. Check out the new Shooting Straight Radio podcast logo.
you'll find that on the shooting straight radio show first book page, actually
shooting straight radio page on first book, you can see it there, follow the page
there and you can actually download or, yeah, download or listen right there on that
platform if you wanted to by clicking on the links. Usually I have it linked to
iHeart or Spotify but You can catch it on any podcast platform. That's the cool
thing about that. The links to all my sponsors are on each episode page.
Just scroll on down there and you will see fine folks like shootingclasses .com,
WJS Guns, Glover Orndorff and Flanagan Wealth Management, Control Jujitsu,
Gunsite, Freedom Guns, the American Complete Hall of Fame, Sakarios Gun Shop,
Counter -Strike Tactical, Ear Care of Melbourne, go -to weapons and quantified
performance. If you'll scroll, I'm actually just scrolled onto the top of that little
information box on this episode, you'll see a button that says "Send us a text." It
doesn't work on all podcast platforms, but if it does for you, feel free to use
that. If if you would like to get ahold of me via email shooting straight radio
show at gmail .com shooting straight radio show at gmail .com or you can message the
program there on farcebook too now as per last week's episode I was properly
corrected by the listener retention squad leader the newest listener retention squad
leader in Maryland. That would be Captain Kevin up there. He reminded me,
because I falsely spoke and said I thought that Jamie Raskin was from Connecticut.
He said, "No, sir, he's stuck here in our state in Maryland, and I'm sorry to hear
that, Kevin. I'm sorry to hear that he's up there representing people like you,
because I know good and well he doesn't represent you or any of your fellow
constitution lists there. But Kevin, you patriots up there have your work cut out
for you in this fight. And I appreciate you being in it. And thanks for listening
to the program and sharing it around with your buddies there. Thank you so much.
Let's dive right on in. I will tell you right now, in regards to the Bruin
principle, you remember what that is. That's where the Supreme Court said to gauge
the constitutionality of any gun control law, you must apply the text and history
standard. First, start with the text of the Second Amendment. I tell you right now,
if you simply read the text of the Second Amendment, you really don't need to dive
too far into history. I will tell you right now any gun control law at any time
since the Second Amendment was ratified in 1791. Well,
I'm sorry, I adopted into the Bill of Rights in 1791.
Any arms law has been in direct conflict therewith,
period, plain and simple, period. It's in conflict. There's no such thing as a
constitutional gun control law. Now the Bruins standard, when applied,
if you really apply it to its nth degree, there is no gun control law in America
that will stand up to it. Especially the Gun Control Act of 1968 and go all the
way back to the National Firearms Act of 1934. They cannot stand.
Now the leftists in this country hate that Bruin principle. They hope that none of
their laws get challenged with a Bruin principle challenge. Now,
when they do, if they're lucky, the case will end up in front of a constitutionally
dyslexic judge who will claim that certain gun control laws are constitutional and
basing it on basically simply nothing if you really come down to it. But does some
of these false standards
that have been raised out there before the text in history,
like in common use, I don't like that standard. That is not a second amendment
friendly standard in common use or dangerous and unusual,
and other such terminology that has come from bad rulings that set bad precedents.
So those things have been propagated throughout the entire nation in every media
outlet to the point where people parrot them. Like this phrase that I've heard
actual people who claim to be conservative views, the Second Amendment is not
unlimited. Bull crap, it most certainly is unlimited. We the people have every right
to own any military weapon imaginable, except you know, I'm going to draw the line,
of course, at atomic weapons, because yeah, I'm not even,
I'm not even happy with governments having atomic weapons.
But, yes, any M1A1A ribs tank, if I can afford it, I should be able to go
purchase a darn thing or a Bradley fighting vehicle or an F -35 Raptor,
anything else. If I've got the money and I want them to pay someone to teach me
how to fly it or drive it, then that's my right, according to the Second Amendment.
But the media and the other leftist sycophants are experts at the propaganda game,
of course, and they're good at planting lies and some of these catchphrases and
other leftist terminology that ends up warming us, warming us way into our everyday
vernacular, like assault weapons, gun violence, and gun safety laws.
Yeah, and that's commie speak, basically. And that commie speak, unfortunately, also
ways the opinions of people who claim to be Republicans and conservatives. Now, with
that in mind, I believe it's time for Pam Bondi to either be extensively briefed on
the Second Amendment or fired and replaced with somebody who's actually
constitutionally sensible, maybe like her assistant AG, we'll tell you about her in
just a second, but This bondee does not have a firm grasp on the depths of the
Second Amendment. She just doesn't. And worse yet, too many other Republicans in
state houses and the federal Congress and all over the country, they also have been
swayed by some of this commie speak. They've given heed to far too many,
what I call, false authorities regarding the Second Amendment. Now, what's a false
authority? A false authority is someone whose fictitious authority is in a certain,
you know, they claim to be an expert in a certain domain, but their reasoning and
all of their, in this case, rulings are substantially called.
And it's usually because their credentials or expertise are either irrelevant,
they're dubious, they're insufficient or not existent altogether. That's the problem
with a lot of these things. Some of these Supreme Court rulings that have crafted
these buzz phrases, these catchphrases,
dangerous and unusual assault weapon and and in common use and all things like that
this is this is the kind of stuff that these rulings have produced I'm sorry I'm
tripping over my brain and my tongue right now I'm trying to go too fast these
rulings have produced these phrases and now These phrases are parroted by even
Republicans as if they are gospel truth and foregone conclusions. So an example of a
false authority would be, let's say, a member of the Marxist media or a president
of a gun control organization, what I call civilian disarmament cartels, or maybe
some actor or some singer who thinks they're an authority and they don't know squat,
any Democrat communists for that matter. A lot of these people put themselves up as
authorities or experts or scholars and they are nothing of the sort.
They're a false authority. So these false authorities create some dubious terminologies
and people start getting led around by the nose by them. Now, your humble host here
doesn't necessarily consider myself to be an authority on the Second Amendment,
but I did sit there and calculate all the hours and all the time that I have put
into producing this program, and to be able to teach this stuff,
you have to be a good student too. So after I started thinking about this, man,
I've got 11 years now that I've been producing this program. And this is my chosen
subject, and I put in enough time and effort to earn a doctorate. So I'm far more
of an authority on the Second Amendment than any Democrat within the common within
the continental United States, and probably most Republicans too. So with that in
mind, I, Dr. Bartlett, am going to edumacate some people out there who,
obviously, unlike my audience, doesn't have a very strong grasp on what the Second
Amendment really means, okay? So I'm going to declare, once again,
the true and actual intentions and views of the founders regarding the Second
Amendment. First, the founders viewed the people as a military force and they wanted
that military force to be more powerful than the government's military force.
Did you know that? Read Federalist Paper Number 46. They wanted it that way.
They of the people to be armed and to outnumber the standard military,
the common military. Matter of fact, a lot of them didn't want a standing army, but
I'm not going to get into that right now. But that's how they viewed we the
people. The purpose of this military force, known as the people,
i .e. the militia, the purpose of the military force was to always be ready and
able to defend against all tyrannical violence, virulence,
I'm tripping over myself, tyrannical violence, whether that violence comes from
criminals in high places or criminals in low places, and to defend against all
enemies of the Constitution both foreign and domestic. In order to fulfill The duties
of this military force known as the militia, i .e. the people, the members of that
military force have every right to military weapons. Period.
The supreme law of the land declares emphatically that the right of the people, that
is, the militia, to acquire arms suitable for war by lawful means and responsibly
bear those arms for war shall not be in the least bit violated, burdened,
obstructed, hindered, or suppressed by any member of any government within the United
States, whether that be federal or state." I'm going to remind you of my favorite
quote from Tench Cox. He asked rhetorically, "Who are the militia?
Are they not ourselves? Is it fear, then, that we shall turn our arms,
each man against his own bosom. Congress has no power to disarm the militia." This
means the people. "Their swords and every other terrible implement of the soldier are
the birthright of an American. The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands
of either the federal or state government, but where I trust in God it will ever
remain in the hands of the people. Amen to that, Mr. Tench Cox.
That is my favorite quote from any of the founders regarding the Second Amendment.
And Mr. Tench Cox wrote that in the Pennsylvania Gazette, February 20th,
1788, three years before the Second Amendment was even adopted into the Bill of
Rights. Now, fast forward to today's trains of thought on the Second Amendment and
compare them because the founders wanted the people to own every possible military
weapon that they were able to afford. But now, not only do the Democrats,
but most Republicans
Do they believe that the Second Amendment does not protect short -barreled rifles,
short -barreled shotguns, suppressors, or fully automatic weapons, when in fact it most
certainly does? If you ever try to inform some of these ignorant people that the
Second Amendment also covers fighter jets and tanks and heavily armored vehicles, just
stand there and watch them chortle derisively toward you. They will guffaw and laugh
like, "Oh, that's about," like, "You're a wacko. You're an extremist if you believe
that." Well, I guess I'm an extremist then. Oh, well. Now,
Miss Pam Bundy, unfortunately, is one of those Republicans who supposes the Second
Amendment does not cover military weapons. She does not have a firm grasp upon the
depths of the Second Amendment. Someone needs to brief her thereupon. Now,
conversely, Bondi's assistant Attorney General, Harmeet Dillon, she made the following
statement in a recent interview, and she said not only are we going to continue the
mission of the Civil Rights Division, the traditional core functions. There are a lot
of new functions that our president wants us to be looking at and new functions
that I want to do. For example, the Second Amendment is a civil right. The Civil
Rights Division has never gone after states that systematically violate our right
under Bruin and other supreme decisions to carry weapons, to bear arms to keep them
in our homes. We are going to do, we're going to be doing that in the civil
rights division. Well, good. I'm glad to hear that.
And it said, but one thing she said, that systematically violate our right under
Bruin and other supreme decisions to carry weapons. No, ma 'am, under the Second
Amendment, That right, we have that right, not by Supreme Court ruling.
So here again, look at just a slight twist
in something that she's saying here and it entirely changes the meaning that almost
to the point that the Supreme Court grants us our right somehow, and they did so
with a couple of allegedly brilliant decisions. That simply is not true. So I hope
that her boss comes to this understanding soon, and I hope she also grasps a more
clear understanding. Because I tell you what, there's a Fifth Circuit Court of
Appeals ruling that just came out three or four days ago that Our Arms Policy
Coalition is calling everything but a dirty little stepchild, and I'll tell you more
about that when we come back after this brief commercial timeout on the Shooting
Straight Radio Podcast. Be right back. Don't go anywhere. The Listener Retention
squads are all on standby.
Hey guys, let me tell you what. Counter -Strike Tactical is the absolute best little
gunstorm Melbourne, and proud sponsors of the Shooting Straight Radio podcast. Come
visit us at 1008 Strawbridge Avenue and see the custom AR builds by Anthony Vallejo,
owner and combat veteran. Plus, AK -47s, handguns, ammo, tactical rifle accessories,
and much more. So stop in and see us, 1008 Strawbridge Avenue, and visit the best
little gun store in Melbourne. Or give
Forty -nine, forty -nine, forty -nine. Tell Anthony that Roy sent you. We can't wait
to see ya. As many of you know, I, your host, am a firearms instructor and I run
all of my firearms training business through shootingclasses .com. Because it simply
doesn't make sense to try to do it all myself. With automated roster creation when
students sign up, payment processing and automated emailing to your students, reminding
them of the class date and time, it simply doesn't make sense to try to do all of
that by yourself. Get signed up with shootingclasses .com today and take a big load
off yourself, shootingclasses .com.
- WJS Guns in North Merritt Island is where you need to go for your firearms,
ammunition, accessories, holsters, body armor, fishing tackle and much more.
WJS Guns also offers blue label pricing for law enforcement officers on multiple
firearms brands. And above all, WJS Guns offers friendly, exceptional service to
everyone, especially to us ladies and first time gun buyers. For more information,
check them out at WJSGuns .com and always tell them Roy sent you.
Norm's Music Shop, producer and music creator for shooting straight radio podcasts.
I can write and record a personalized music track for your audio or video projects.
Do you want a song for a special occasion? I can do that. For more information
contact normsmusicshop @gmail .com
Let's create your musical identity. Thank you. Welcome back to the program.
We've been discussing the rank ignorance of the Second Amendment in the minds of too
many elected officials and too many people in positions of service like Attorney
General Pam Bondi and she has an opportunity to really just be a way paver to
getting us back to the original intentions of the Second Amendment but she doesn't
understand the depths of the Second Amendment. Now you'll notice when I was talking
about Supreme Court rulings and things like that and how those are always referred
to as being the
definitive explanation of the Second Amendment. They're not. Very few of them are.
The only one that got it right was the was the Bruin decision. It said it must it
must be confined to the standard of text and history, but you know they never quote
the text of the Second Amendment. And if they do, they it's a it's a passing thing
and they don't really try to dissect what the amendment itself actually says.
And the the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals recently, several days ago,
made a horrible, horrible ruling. Well, actually they made it, I'm sorry, let me
read the article because I'm getting ahead of myself and I'm giving you bum
information here. Let me, this is an article from an article by Mark Chestnut. It
says a brief filed by the federal government in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals
in a case involving the constitutionality of banning machine guns has one pro -gun
rights group seeing red. The case, United States versus Justin Bryce Brown,
revolves around the federal government charging Justice Bryce Brown with knowingly
possessing a machine gun and violation of federal law. Brown's attorney argued that
under the landmark 2022 decision in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association
versus Bruin, the statute was unconstitutional as applied to him.
And guess what happened? The district court dismissed the charge against Brown in
January of this year. They basically said that the and violated the Second Amendment
as it applied to him. As a matter of fact, I addressed this ruling,
excuse me, several episodes ago, multiple episodes ago, back around that time,
and it's a correct ruling. You cannot possibly say that the Second Amendment covers
the banning of machine guns because it doesn't. Well, what really ticks me off is
now the government has appealed to the Fifth Circuit.
They are appealing the ruling. And I want to know why. I want to know why Ms.
Bondi didn't say, "What are you doing down there?" So one of her acting U .S.
attorneys for the Southern District of Mississippi, one Patrick Lemon, filed a brief
on April 24th and argued that, quote, "machine guns are not the kind of arms
protected by the Second Amendment and that America's history of regulating dangerous
and unusual weapons confirms the federal machine guns ban constitutionality." Really?
How? How is it you can say so definitively that machine guns are not protected by
the Second Amendment. How can you say that? You did not even reference the Second
Amendment. You didn't even reference the text of the Second Amendment, and you're
afraid to reference the text of the Second Amendment because you cannot qualify your
comment according there too. That's a really
statement. What what history of regulating dangerous and unusual weapons are you
referring to because first of all all weapons are dangerous. I mean that's how they
were designed and they couldn't be called weapons if they weren't dangerous. So where
do you get this crap about dangerous and unusual weapons? I don't like that phrase
but that's one that's being bandied about as if it's full. Weapons are supposed to
be dangerous otherwise they really couldn't be called ready for this weapons.
Now secondly machine guns are not unusual. They ain't to break it to you but
there's a lot of machine guns owned by a lot of people in the United States of
America. My employer owns God knows how many thousands of and he builds them also,
uh, they're not unusual in the least. Our military has been using machine guns since
what, uh, what 1910 or so, maybe even earlier.
So Miss body, you need to step in here and rebuke this little punk. You need to,
I mean, he's under your command. You need to shut him down on this. He's not, he's
not just breathtakingly ignorant, he is actively violating the United States
Constitution, the supreme law of the land, that you and he both swore an oath to
uphold and defend. But you're not upholding it, you're not defending it. Mr.
Lemon's brief obviously drew a lot of incoming fire from the Firearms Policy
Coalition or the FPC and they called it not only horribly flawed,
but insanely offensive. Amen to that, absolutely. One portion of the brief that
really ticked them off was when Mr. Lemon, now remember what I said about citing
false authorities. Mr. Lemon, Mr. U .S. Attorney,
Mr. Lemon,
cited The Trace. If you don't know what The Trace is, it's a very rabidly anti -gun
publication of Michael Bloomberg's so -called Every Time for Gun Safety.
And he's citing that as his source for information. You're citing an anti -second
amendment publication. My word. Brandon Combs,
who is the Firearms Policy coalition president, he said in a press release regarding
the brief, he said, "Acting U .S. Attorney Lemons' horrifically flawed brief is
unprincipled and an incredible affront to the people and our constitutionally protected
rights. Not only does this lemon of a brief expressly advance anti -liberty arguments,
it goes so far as to cite the radically anti -Second Amendment every time propaganda
publication the trace in support of its position. This brief could not be less
consistent with President Trump's protecting the Second Amendment rights executive
order. Amen. Well, President Trump's executive order on protecting the Second Amendment
does matter, at least it should, to Mr. Lemon. Combs said the brief should prompt
the President and Attorney General Pam Bondi to look into Lemon's ability to respect
the executive order. After all, the U .S. Attorney filed this poorly thought -out
brief on behalf of the federal government, which Trump heads. Combs also continued.
He said, "This insanely offensive brief should never have been filed in any court,
let alone at the Fifth Circuit. It should be immediately withdrawn and thrown into
the trash, along with Mr. Lemon's ability to make these filings in the future." Hey,
amen to that, Mr. Combs. Amen to that. But do you see how those buzz phrases,
those gun Stroll engendered, or what should I say? Civilian disarmament cartel
engendered catchphrases. Dangerous and unusual. Weapons are supposed to be dangerous.
Just 'cause they're unusual doesn't make them more dangerous than any other weapon.
Mr. Combs added that lemon filing, that the lemon filing is a prime example of why
the firearms policy coalition has been asking President Trump to appoint a competent
Second Amendment czar to coordinate the administration's agenda across the government
and with stakeholders in Second Amendment litigation. He also concluded our rights
must be protected at all cost and the American people are counting on President
Trump and Attorney General Bondi to fulfill their promise to do exactly that.
Well, I can say that it's for me and my fellow constitutionalist, we're not really
counting on her to do anything but protect her political career. You see down here
in Florida, she used to be the AG here. She doesn't have a good track record with
the Second Amendment. Now, if you think she's changed her posture about the an
amendment since she's gone to Washington, not in the least, because if she had,
she would not have granted approval for this filing. She would have flat out said,
you cannot file that, but she didn't. Did she? Nope. Now,
speaking of Bruin, notice also how so many states in lower federal courts either to
ignore the Bruin standard of text and history, much like the filing by Mr.
Lemon.
But they also uphold corrupt laws that were designed in direct defiance of Bruin.
A lot of courts have been doing this. I'm kind of surprised that the Fifth Circuit
Court of Appeals upheld or actually ruled the way they did before the federal
government filed in opposition. But this is because they are willfully abusing their
power to assail the Constitution and they know it. That's the problem. That's why
they're making these rulings. I can't drive this home deep enough.
I don't think I've got a lot of faith in any court in this country anymore.
And not yet, that includes the Supreme Court. I can't trust Justice Roberts anymore.
I think the others have been compromised. They also have been influenced by precedent
on the Second Amendment rather than the actual text in history. Now one more case,
the US Appeals Court ruled that assault weapons bans are not unconstitutional.
I guarantee you they are. There's an article by Morgan Pollan,
P -O -L -E -N, from the University of Pittsburgh School of Law, and the date on this
was the 18th of April. And here's the article, and we're gonna have some fun with
this. The U .S. Court of Appeals for the first circuit on Thursday held that a
Massachusetts law banning the sale transfer or possession of an assault weapon is not
unconstitutional under the Second Amendment to the U .S. Constitution. Where do they
ever get such an idea as that? Probably a lot of court rulings prior to them.
That's probably why. They, First of all, define an assault weapon.
Assault is a verb. Yeah,
it's only designed for assault. It's funny, the same exact rifles put into the hands
of federal agents are referred to as PDWs, personal defense weapons. Well,
how come there are assault weapons when they're in our hands, huh?
back to the article. The case was brought by Massachusetts resident Joseph Capen who
announced he was planning on purchasing items covered by the law for purposes of
self -defense. Judge Gary Katzman writing for a three -judge panel wrote that the
court first needed to consider whether the Massachusetts law was "consistent with this
nation's historical tradition of firearms regulation. Well, what historical tradition of
firearm regulation, huh?
Well, point to any historical tradition of firearm regulation, especially from that
time period. Point to one, you know, the only laws around that time that forbade
the keeping and bearing of They were all aimed at black people, whether they were
slaves or freed. They were aimed at a certain race of people only.
You want to try to tell me that those were constitutional?
Catsman held that the ban on AR -15 models in particular did not unduly burden
civilian self -defense. Well, first of all, You don't have any right to burden the
Second Amendment right at all or to burden the free exercise of any of our rights.
How much of a burden is allowable in your estimation there under the Second
Amendment? None. How about that? None. None. No burdening of the Second Amendment is
allowable, okay? Civilian self -defense also is only a portion of the exercise of
that right. So you see, this is more obfuscation. This is trying to say,
well, Second Amendment is about your personal self -defense. No, it's not. It's also
about defending liberty across the land from sea to shining sea. And that was the
purpose of the militias, yes, to keep the government in check. That was the purpose
of that. Now, he held that they did not unduly burden civilian self -defense,
particularly because Capon and other appellates failed to show any instances where
these models have been used in self -defense scenario. Well, how many of those
instances would you like? I mean, a really quick Google search would probably turn
up a couple of hundred of them. How about that? How about start there? Katzman
emphasized the long -standing tradition of regulating and often outright banning of,
quote, "specific weapons" once it became clear that they posed a unique danger to
public safety, including mass deaths and violent crime unrelated to self -defense.
Okay, those,
Those were mostly bullion knives that were outlawed. Any of those laws that banned
particular weapons were edged weapons mostly, okay?
Not only that, but if our AR -15s posed such a unique danger to public safety,
America would be awash in blood, up to their knee, maybe to our waist,
because There's roughly 30 million of these weapons in civilian hands right now. How
can they be uniquely dangerous to public safety? If they were,
y 'all would really, really know it and it wouldn't take any convincing or any court
cases to drive it home. And by the way, like I said, only a few states ever
really banned any specific weapons and again they were mostly bowie knives and those
bands never lasted and all were repealed shortly thereafter. So why don't you talk
about that? Why don't you talk about repealing the Gun Control Act and the National
Firearms Act? The article continues interpreting the U .S.
Supreme Court's decision in Bruin, the first circuit held that if certain laws at
the founding, regulated firearms used to address certain issues, there is a strong
presumption that current laws doing the same awful will fall within a permissible
category of regulations. Okay, once again, there were no gun control laws during the
founding period, except for the ones that were aimed specifically at black people.
Are those the laws you're referencing here?
Finally, the court noted that its ruling was not inconsistent with the landmark
Supreme Court case. Notice they didn't cite the Second Amendment. They cited the
Heller case, which while it had its good points, it also created some more of these
stupid buzz phrases that have been used by the civilian disarmament cartels and media
people and elected officials ad nauseam. And they've been quoted as if they're gospel
and darn near written within the text of the second amendment itself. They said it
was not inconsistent with the landmark Supreme court case, a district of Columbia
versus Heller, which extended the Second Amendment right to bear arms to individuals
apart from any military purpose. Did you catch that the way it was worded? They're
saying that a Supreme Court case Heller extended the Second Amendment right to
individuals. It did no such freaking thing.
That right was already inherently possessed by every American born in this country
and /or naturalized. That right is already possessed. That heller case did not extend
the right. Again, do you see how this crap is spread?
I just want to grab people in the screen. "No, no, no, no," whenever I hear
phrases like "in common use," "dangerous and unusual," "not what the founders
intended." Yeah. As as Heller specifically noted that the Second Amendment right was
not unlimited, yes it is, and did not necessarily pertain to weapons designed for
military use. Really? Quite the opposite is true because,
conversely, the Second Amendment is indeed unlimited and was specifically crafted to
restrain the government from hindering the people from owning weapons of war.
If you read Federalist Paper Number 46, that is so clearly and unmistakably
established that you would have to ignore the text of it in order to say it wasn't
true.
Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell said that the court's decision is,
quote, "A tremendous victory for our state." No, it's not.
It was a tremendous victory for the Massachusetts state government and all the little
communists y 'all got waddling around therein, but not for the people, lady,
not for the people. Executive Director of the Gun Rights Foundation,
Hannah Hill, said in a post that the decision was, quote, "full of absolute defiance
of Bruin." I couldn't say it any better myself. That's exactly what it is.
All of these lower courts, these circuit courts, they are absolutely purposely
ignoring the Bruin decision text and standard principle.
All of them. Why? Well, what are they quoting? Oh, they go back to the Heller
decision because there's stuff in there that they actually like and stuff in there
that they can use to strip us of our arms. Yeah, they'll go back to other
precedents and say, well, these rulings said this and because that ruling said that
about this, then we're going to go with that too. Wrong. The text of the Second
Amendment, a well -regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state,
the right of the people to keep and bear arms for war, shall not be infringed.
That means it's not hindered. It cannot be stymied. It cannot be delayed.
You can do nothing, government, from keeping the people, from keeping and bearing
arms for war. Machine guns are covered by the Second Amendment.
Bradley fighting vehicles are covered by the Second Amendment. Apache helicopters
covered by the Second Amendment. How far you want to go? Because we the people have
every right to the same weapons of war that our government has and it was supposed
to be that way because as I said at the beginning of the program, our founders
viewed we the people as a military force and you cannot change my mind about that
one bit. And if you ever want to try, I'm not speaking in particular to my
listeners, but maybe somebody out there that might be listening and say, ah, this
guy's full of crap. Anytime you'd like to be on the program and dispute me, right
to my, not to my face, of course, because I don't know where you're at and you'll
probably have to call in via phone. But if you'd like to do that, open challenge
right now. Open challenge. By a matter of fact, I'm another open challenge, anybody
out there come on the show and by using the text and the history of the second
amendment proved to me that the founders did not intend for us to own military
weapons. Come on the program. If you got the stones for it, I challenge you here
and now I challenge the rest of us to stay locked and loaded and trained up,
stay armed. Make sure you got plenty of, uh, trauma, of trauma kits and things like
that stocked up. Stock up on food and other things. Stock up on ammo.
I think I told you about why in the last episode. If you didn't listen to that
one yet, go listen to it and you'll see why I say that. And never forget, incoming
rounds always have the right of way. Royce out.
♪ If ♪