Daily News Links



The first in a regular roundup of gun policy-related news items.


I take this first one with a grain of salt until I hear more. If it turns out to be true, then geez…


Court Grants Injunction in SAF Challenge of Deerfield, IL Gun Ban
A circuit court judge in Lake County, Illinois has granted an injunction against the Chicago suburb of Deerfield, blocking the village from enforcing a ban on so-called “assault weapons”




Neither of these events are going to get much play in the media, for reasons we’re all very familiar with by now.


Beginning to see more of these stories coming out of CA.


Not news, but nice to see an outlet like Vice follow stories like this.


In today’s “the anti-tyranny argument for guns is a prepper fantasy” news:

Sure, we’re not gonna fight of Seal Team 6, but an armed populace raises the stakes for these kinds of shenanigans.



This sort of article sounds a common refrain: the blight of losely regulated civilian gun ownership in the US has externalities even outside our borders (and dovetails nicely with the current immigrant detention scandal).

I’m going to post separately about creative solutions for the straw purchases problem.


From the FB post where I saw this link:

  1. Maryland has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the country. They failed.

  2. This shooter passed and background check and purchased his firearm in compliance with these strict laws.

  3. The firearm involved, as in the recent Texas high school shooting, was a pump action shotgun. This guns are not on anyone’s “ban list” and cannot be banned under the 2nd Amendment as applied by SCOTUS.

  4. In spite of not using a so called “assault weapon”, this sick individual was able to kill five and seriously wound two in spite of a 60 second law enforcement response time. This proves what gun rights advocates have been saying is true: Banning so called “assault weapons” will do nothing to reduce crime or save lives in mass shootings.


I’ll throw this in the daily links bucket :smile:


You can tell the author is not a fan…


To be fair though, Andy Greenberg has been pretty good at sticking to describing what’s going on without deliberately trying to sway people one way or another on the issue. His early coverage of the Liberator release (which he did for Forbes) was reasonable.

The only people that have anything to fear from this development are those that wish they could ban guns altogether. I can’t believe it took half a decade for this to finally sort itself out. ITAR restrictions are incredibly out of date regardless - the cold war has been over for quite a while now. :face_with_raised_eyebrow:



My head is spinning trying to interpret who this will affect actual laws and carry rights. There is a good interpretation from Josh Blackman on Twitter but I’m still trying to wrap my head around how this affects public policy. It sounds like there are a two possible outcomes:

  1. Request for en blanc is honored, and 9th Circuit reverses this ruling. This might lead to the case being taken up to SCOTUS if it agrees to take the case (much more likely if Kavanaugh gets confirmed).
  2. No further appeals to this ruling, or en blanc gets denied. This ruling then affects the western states in the 9th Circuit, and residents of these states would then be able to exercise open carry of firearms, though no doubt under other state-defined restrictions.

I would be shocked if Californians are able to walk around strapped with a piece in public. If so, I expect to see a massive sweep of “no gun zone” signs being posted by almost every private business and government office, effectively constraining the ability of residents to do this.

EDIT: Found a very good explanation on Reddit on the implications, a good read.


The absolute hysteria over this is breathtaking.


Gonna have to wait a few more days…