MAJOR BREAKING 2A NEWS: ANTI-GUN DOJ DOES IT AGAIN...

Published on August 3, 2024
Duration: 15:01

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has filed a brief arguing that a non-violent felon, Brian Range, can still be disarmed under the Second Amendment, citing the Rahimi decision. The speaker contends the DOJ's arguments fail to distinguish between violence and non-violence, misinterpret the Rahimi holding's requirements for court findings of credible threats, and improperly apply historical legal precedents. The case is being considered by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, with potential for further appeal to the Supreme Court.

Quick Summary

The DOJ argues in the Brian Range case that non-violent felons can be disarmed under the Second Amendment, referencing the Rahimi decision. However, critics contend the DOJ misinterprets Rahimi, which requires a finding of credible violent threat, and improperly applies historical precedents that focused on weapon misuse and violence, not mere felony conviction.

Chapters

  1. 00:00Breaking 2A News: DOJ Files Brief in Brian Range Case
  2. 00:35Introduction: Mark Smith, Host of The Four Boxes Diner
  3. 00:54Background: The Supreme Court's Rahimi Decision
  4. 01:38The Third Circuit and the Brian Range Case
  5. 01:50Brian Range's Non-Violent Felony Conviction
  6. 02:56DOJ's 35-Page Brief and Arguments
  7. 03:42DOJ Brief Fails to Distinguish Violence vs. Non-Violence
  8. 04:31Inconsistency with Federal Gun Control Law (18 USC 922 G1)
  9. 05:08Distinguishing Lifetime Ban vs. Temporary Disarmament
  10. 05:15Lack of Court Finding of Fact in Range's Case
  11. 06:10DOJ's Historical Argument: Non-Violent Felonies and Death Penalty
  12. 07:02Historical Precedents in Rahimi: Surety and Going Armed Laws
  13. 07:33Focus on Misuse of Weapons and Violence
  14. 08:55DOJ's Argument on Disarming Supporters of the Crown
  15. 09:45Justice Kavanaugh's Concurrence on Historical Analogs
  16. 10:27DOJ's Reliance on Post-Ratification History
  17. 11:08Kavanaugh on Tradition vs. History
  18. 12:05Supreme Court on Inconsistent Post-Ratification History
  19. 13:27Prediction: Third Circuit to Reaffirm Range Decision
  20. 14:14Potential Appeal to the Supreme Court

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the core argument of the DOJ's brief in the Brian Range case?

The DOJ argues that Brian Range, a non-violent felon, can still be disarmed under the Second Amendment, even after the Rahimi decision. They contend that historical laws and precedents allow for the disarmament of individuals convicted of certain felonies, regardless of their violent history.

How does the Rahimi decision impact the Brian Range case?

The Rahimi decision established that individuals posing a credible, physically violent threat to a third party can be temporarily disarmed. The DOJ is attempting to apply this precedent to argue for the disarmament of non-violent felons, a move the speaker disputes as a misinterpretation of Rahimi's narrow scope.

What are the main criticisms of the DOJ's arguments regarding historical precedents?

Critics argue the DOJ misinterprets historical laws, such as surety and going armed statutes, which focused on actual or threatened violence and weapon misuse. They also contend that wartime measures, like disarming those loyal to the crown during the Revolution, are not valid historical analogs for modern gun control on non-violent citizens.

What is the significance of the distinction between temporary disarmament and lifetime bans in this case?

The Rahimi decision upheld temporary disarmament based on a finding of violent threat. The DOJ's argument for disarming non-violent felons under 18 USC 922 G1 often results in a lifetime ban. Critics argue this lifetime ban is fundamentally different from the temporary, threat-based disarmament permitted by Rahimi.

Related News

All News →

More 2nd Amendment & Law Videos You Might Like

More from The Four Boxes Diner

View all →