This bodes well for any legal challenges to “red flag” laws.
>
This bodes well for any legal challenges to “red flag” laws.
>
Presumes facts not in evidence.
Judges, when it comes to ‘gun control’, will ALWAYS thread a camel through the eye of a needle; regardless of the plain, simple English of the 2nd, “...shall NOT be infringed.”
Concur.
If the accused is not allowed to face his accuser and force the accuser/government to prove the acquisitions beyond a reasonable doubt, the law or regulation is unconstitutional and illegal.
Accusers and government agencies that fail to obtain a conviction must be held liable for the accused’s legal fees, and subject to civil suit for slander, liable, and defamation of character.
ROTFL. Court decisions are whatever the judge wants, and precedents can be distinguished all sorts of ways to get the intended outcome.
Took the words right out of my mouth.