The 9th Circuit Says the Right To Bear Arms Does Not Extend Beyond Your Doorstep
According to the dissent, the appeals court "has decided that the Second Amendment does not mean what it says."
According to the dissent, the appeals court "has decided that the Second Amendment does not mean what it says."
It is hard to see how an "assault weapon" ban or expanded background checks could have prevented this attack.
For possessing a gun while committing a crime—even when no one is killed—too many defendants are slammed with sentences decades or even centuries longer than justice demands.
As usual, the senator and her allies want to ban guns based on arbitrary distinctions.
One measure would require checks for nearly all firearm transfers, while the other would increase delays in completing sales.
The state's ban on "large-capacity magazines" is easy to justify, as long as you assume its benefits and ignore its costs.
The policies he favors would arbitrarily limit Second Amendment rights and threaten the industry that makes it possible to exercise them.
Sheila Jackson Lee's sweeping licensing and registration scheme suggests what Democrats would do if they didn't have to worry about the Second Amendment.
New gun owners are unlikely to embrace disarmament schemes from a government they distrust.
A challenge to the federal ban on gun possession by people convicted of felonies gives SCOTUS a chance to rectify its neglect of the Second Amendment.
The senators warned that the Court might have to be "restructured" if it did not reach the conclusion they preferred in a Second Amendment case.
Democrats and Republicans agree on that point, although they disagree about what it means in practice.
San Francisco writer Guy Smith finds little evidence that the availability of firearms explains differences in suicide and homicide rates.
"I believe that I'm channeling my ancestors," says Second Amendment activist Brent Holmes, who carries an assault rifle to protests in Richmond, Virginia.
The SCOTUS contender's 2019 dissent will alarm gun control supporters but reassure people who want judges to take this constitutional provision as seriously as others.
In the 20th century, far more people were murdered by genocidal governments than by armed criminals.
The 5th Circuit judge is a mixed bag from a libertarian perspective.
Why do progressives who worry about unequal justice support policies that are bound to make that problem worse?
Millions of new firearm owners who have lost faith in cops and government will be a tough audience for shopworn gun control schemes.
The rhetoric may not be accurate, but it is definitely useful.
The Democratic presidential candidate favors the same magazine limit that a federal appeals court just declared unconstitutional.
For those who have been advising Americans for years that we should lay down our own weapons and trust armed government employees, this year has been a massive reality check.
This unilateral executive action has been scrutinized by both Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch and U.S. District Judge Brantley Starr.
The state boasts of blocking 754 illegal purchases, but it wrongly tagged 101,047 law-abiding people as prohibited. Any of them could have been targeted.
Gun opponents would leave predatory cops armed and their victims helpless.
Friday A/V Club: Great moments from the C-SPAN archive
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s unilateral order confirms suspicions that government is always on the verge of abusing its power.
The Court decided that New York City's revision of its restrictions on transporting guns gave the plaintiffs what they sought.
The store owner thought his employee acted in reasonable defense of property and self. The police disagreed.
Lawmakers are peddling restrictions on self-defense and other rights to a frightened public.
The presidential contender has trouble explaining why the guns he wants to ban fall outside the Second Amendment.
When it comes to guns, pretty much nothing is legal in New Jersey, according to their police.
A bizarre Florida “red flag” case shows the importance of safeguards that protect people’s Second Amendment rights.
A high-profile gun case actually presents meaty questions of administrative law
The former vice president's accusations require a couple of footnotes.
Under New York's rules, licensed pistol and revolver owners were not allowed to leave home with their handguns unless they were traveling to or from a shooting range.
The presidential candidate’s gun control platform, like his defense of "stop and frisk," sacrifices civil liberties on the altar of public safety.
Legislators who approved a bunch of other gun control bills could not agree on what features make a firearm intolerable.
In Broward County, judges almost never reject police petitions for gun confiscation orders.
The former New York mayor is being called a racist for his former support of searching young minorities without cause.
Such inflammatory exaggeration seems designed to avoid a substantive discussion of the presidential candidate's gun control proposals.
The billionaire former three-term mayor of New York panders to Democratic loyalists rather than laying out a vision for a prosperous, tolerant America.
The bill's requirements for "emergency" orders are loose, and it does not give respondents a right to a court-appointed lawyer.
Erroneous predictions of violence at the Richmond rally conflated civil libertarians with militant racists.
Plus: Clinton says "nobody likes" Bernie, Biden wants Section 230 revoked, Iran takes responsibility for Jan. 8 plane crash, and more...
If politicians are going to paint their opponents as illegitimate, they should be prepared to receive the same treatment in return.
There is no easy way to determine whether someone is spending a lot on guns because they like guns or because they plan to commit an act of terror.
Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.
This modal will close in 10