Videos tagged with 2AF

This video discusses California's 11% excise tax on firearms and ammunition, highlighting its legal challenges. A lawsuit, Powe Weapons and Gear v. DTFA, argues the tax is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment and Supreme Court precedent, citing cases like NYSRPA v. Bruen and others that prohibit taxing constitutional rights. The video details the lawsuit's progress, including the filing of a motion for summary judgment.

This video critically analyzes a significant gun control package in Virginia, focusing on proposed bans of 'assault weapons' and magazines exceeding 10 rounds. The host, identified as a subject matter expert on Second Amendment legislation, details how Senate Bill 749, as amended, prohibits possession of previously legal large-capacity magazines without compensation. The video urges viewers to contact legislators and support advocacy groups like VCDL, GOA, FPC, and 2AF to oppose these measures.

This video provides a critical analysis of California's SB 704, detailing its implications for firearm barrels. The speaker, an authority on Second Amendment legal issues, explains the distinction between the law's effective date (January 1, 2026) and its operative date (July 1, 2027), highlighting new requirements for background checks, DOJ registration, and in-person dealer sales for barrels. The content also touches upon potential legal challenges and the strategic use of delayed operative dates by lawmakers.

This video discusses a new Supreme Court challenge, Grant v. Rubella, filed by the 2AF, against Connecticut's ban on modern semi-automatic rifles. The case argues that semi-automatic rifles in common use for lawful purposes, including the AR-15, are protected by the Second Amendment. The speaker highlights Justice Kavanaugh's previous statements suggesting the Court should address the AR-15 issue, referencing the "common use" standard established in Heller and the impact of the Bruen decision. The video also mentions other pending cases before the Supreme Court related to semi-auto bans.

This video discusses the impact of California's 'Glock ban' (AB1127) and Glock's decision to discontinue most models, including roster-approved Gen 3s. It highlights the potential for Glock's new V series to be introduced to the California market due to a specific provision in AB1127 that allows previously rostered firearms to reapply with design modifications. The video also touches on the James V. Bont lawsuit challenging the ban and the ongoing importance of the California Roster of Handguns.

A federal lawsuit, James v. Bont, has been filed against California's AB127, commonly known as the 'Glock ban.' The lawsuit, brought by the FPC, 2AF, NRA, and individual plaintiffs, challenges the constitutionality of the law which bans the sale or transfer of Glock and Glock-style handguns with cruciform trigger bars. Plaintiffs argue these firearms are in common use for self-defense and thus protected by the Second Amendment.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a unanimous decision overturning California's AB2571, a law that aimed to limit information about firearms to younger generations. This ruling is a significant victory for both the First and Second Amendments, affirming that fundamental rights cannot be infringed upon by attempts to control information flow. The court clarified that the constitutional analysis applied to the entirety of the law, preventing California from restricting access to Second Amendment-related information.

As of April 22nd, California will begin accepting non-resident concealed carry permits for the first time, following a court order. This change, driven by organizations like CRPA and GOA, allows individuals who do not reside in California to apply for permits, though the process involves significant hoops similar to those faced by residents. The application requires membership in specific organizations, online submission of details, and a live-fire training component in the applicant's home state.

A recent court order in California, CRPA v. LASC, mandates the creation of a non-resident concealed carry permit. While this offers an option for frequent visitors to California, the application process is described as difficult and lengthy, mirroring requirements for California residents. Applicants must be members of specific plaintiff organizations and undergo evaluations, with the permit itself carrying significant restrictions.

This video details the significant financial impact of California's new 11% excise tax on firearms and ammunition, which took effect on July 1st. The speaker, drawing on information from a California firearms dealer, breaks down how this tax, combined with existing sales taxes and fees, dramatically increases the final cost of firearms, potentially making them unaffordable for many residents. A lawsuit challenging this tax is also mentioned.

A significant legal victory allows non-residents to apply for concealed carry permits in California, stemming from the CRPA v. SD lawsuit. This ruling, while not immediate reciprocity, opens a pathway for US citizens outside California to obtain a license, though the process involves specific training, interviews, and adherence to California's complex firearm laws, including magazine capacity limits and sensitive location restrictions. The process is described as slow, expensive, and time-consuming.

This video discusses the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals' decision regarding California's SB2 law and its 'sensitive locations' provisions. It highlights a split decision where some locations were upheld for carry, while others were restricted. The video announces that the 2AF has filed for an en banc hearing, seeking a full Ninth Circuit panel review of the decision, with potential further appeal to the Supreme Court.