“We can either live in a paranoid politically correct world frantically trying not to offend the Hitlers and Mohammeds, and blaming their victims when they kill, or we can be free men and women who have chosen to take the power to defend our rights into our own hands.

While a thousand organizations use the Holocaust as a platform for speeches about tolerance, Children Of Jewish Holocaust Survivors [Jews Can Shoot] is conducting firearms training… Freedom is not defended with empty idealism easily perverted into appeasement of evil, but with the force of arms.”

Daniel Greenfield / Sultan Knish blog

All too many of the other great tragedies of history - Stalin's atrocities, the killing fields of Cambodia, the Holocaust, to name but a few - were perpetrated by armed troops against unarmed populations. Many could well have been avoided mitigated, had the perpetrators known their intended victims were equipped with a rifle and twenty bullets apiece... If a few hundred Jewish fighter in the Warsaw Ghetto could hold off the Wehrmacht for almost a month with only a handful weapons, six million Jews armed with rifles could not so easily have been herded into cattle cars.

Alex Kozinski, Chief Judge, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
Silveira v. Lockyer, 2003

Habah l'hargecha hashkem l'hargo -- "If someone is coming to kill you, rise against him and kill him first."

Second Amendment

Judges wrestle with latest Supreme Court gun rights opinion

by Doris Wise Montrose on September 22, 2024

“Head-scratching and disagreement over handling Second Amendment challenges, …” The 27 words of the Second Amendment is quite clear so I don’t understand why there would be “head-scratching and disagreement”. That is the very reason why judges matter. And who appoints them.

The Supreme Court’s latest opinion on gun rights has done little so far to eliminate the disagreement and confusion among federal judges who must decide the constitutionality of gun restrictions across the nation, legal experts say.

In the United States v. Rahimi decision in June, the justices sought to clarify how the courts should analyze whether a firearm law violates the Second Amendment and wrote that some judges had “misunderstood” the court’s 2022 landmark decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which expanded gun rights.

While the Bruen decision found that restrictions must be consistent with the nation’s “historical tradition of firearm regulation,” the Rahimi decision said those laws do not require a “historical twin,” but instead should be “consistent with the principles that underpin our regulatory tradition.”

By Ryan Tarinelli

Kamala Harris once said police could pay surprise visits to legal gun owners' homes for safe storage checks

First federal trial over Illinois assault weapon ban begins

"All too many of the other great tragedies of history—Stalin’s atrocities, the killing fields of Cambodia, the Holocaust, to name but a few—were perpetrated by armed troops against unarmed populations. Many could well have been avoided or mitigated, had the perpetrators known their intended victims were equipped with a rifle and twenty bullets apiece, as the Militia Act required here. ... If a few hundred Jewish fighters in the Warsaw Ghetto could hold off the Wehrmacht for almost a month with only a handful of weapons, six million Jews armed with rifles could not so easily have been herded into cattle cars." — Silveira v Lockyer, (9th Cir. 2003) (Kozinski, J. dissenting.)