legal Archives - Page 9 of 10

‘Virtual’ Gun Rights Conference Biggest in History, Says SAF

“It was the biggest gathering of gun rights activists in the world,” said Alan Gottlieb, founder and executive vice president of the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), in the aftermath of the 35th annual Gun Rights Policy Conference 2020 (GRPC), held September 19-20, 2020 entirely online for the first time in history.

[ Read the SemperVerus article, The 4 Basic Rules of Gun Safety ]

The event was viewed by well over 300,000 gun rights activists across the country on multiple platforms, and more than 4,100 people pre-registered for the event, which shatters all previous records, Gottlieb reported. He said it would be impossible to get an exact count of all the people who watched because several groups held “Watch Parties” attended by many people watching the program on large screens. What’s more, he said the GRPC program, which appeared as a live Facebook event, is still being viewed, either in its entirety or in segments, which may be found by visiting the SAF website or YouTube.

By semperverus
Posted on 09/23/202005/11/2025

Worldviews and Emotional Assumptions in the Gun Civil Rights Debate

Heated debates about law-abiding responsible American gun ownership civil rights tend to start and end as emotional arguments stemming from dug-in presupposed assumptions and predetermined worldviews, rather than inquiring open-minded attitudes that lead to acceptance of convincing proof.

[ Read the SemperVerus article, Why Do You Carry a Gun for Self-Defense? ]

Unalienable human rights, such as the Second Amendment, are based on the steadfast recognition that there are certain nonnegotiable, self-evident givens in human nature, prior to the state’s involvement, which the state is obligated to respect. Natural human rights are meant to be inviolate; incapable of being reduced to merely legal rights or privileges.

[ Read the SemperVerus article, Brief Answers for People Who Are Against the 2nd Amendment ]

A myriad of statistical analyses are already available that support how the gun civil rights position is effective in crime control, such as

[ Read the SemperVerus article, Important Judicial Decisions Regarding Self-Defense Law ]

Because the facts are readily viewable online, the following chart is an attempt to help you recognize the underlying basic emotional premises from which each side approaches the subject. Once these perspectives are identified and acknowledged, perhaps feelings will subside to the facts, helping to deescalate emotional-only arguments.

[ Read the SemperVerus article, US Dept. of Justice Now Protecting the Second Amendment As a Civil Right ]

Important Judicial Decisions Regarding Self-Defense Law

The following legal decisions concern the law of self-defense. Some of the rulings are final and others are not. They’re presented here, along with salient excerpts, to be read for their excellent judicial logic about the absolute civil right of armed self-defense as established by the framers of the US Constitution.

[ Read the SemperVerus article, USA State Constitutions Providing for Armed Self-Defense ]

District of Columbia Court of Appeals ruling: Tyree Benson v. United States (March 5, 2026) by Associate Judge Joshua Deahl (pdf).

This ruling states that, because firearm magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition are in common and ubiquitous use for lawful purposes, the District of Columbia’s outright ban on them violates the US Second Amendment, and that these magazines qualify as “arms” protected by the Constitution.

“Magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition are ubiquitous in our country, numbering in the hundreds of millions, accounting for about half of the magazines in the hands of our citizenry, and they come standard with the most popular firearms sold in America today. Because these magazines are arms in common and ubiquitous use by law-abiding citizens across this country, we agree with Benson and the United States that the District’s outright ban on them violates the Second Amendment.”

“An 11+ magazine facilitates armed self-defense because it is used to load a firearm, and it then feeds successive cartridges into the gun’s firing chamber as a person shoots—a particularly essential feature for semiautomatic guns—eliminating any need to manually reload the gun until the magazine is spent and itself needs to be reloaded….Because magazines feed ammunition into certain guns, and ammunition is necessary for such a gun to function as intended, magazines are ‘arms’ within the meaning of the Second Amendment….Magazines of all capacities are thus arms covered by the plain text of the Second Amendment….Any components integral to a firearm’s operation, like magazines, fit comfortably within the Second Amendment’s protection of arms.”

“…arms that are utterly ubiquitous in this country, like the hundreds of millions of 11+ magazines, cannot be banned. Just as handguns cannot be banned because they are the most preferred [type of] firearm in the nation, the 11+ magazines that tend to accompany them are the most preferred type of magazine and likewise cannot be banned.”

“…one perfectly coherent view is that law-abiding citizens everywhere should have access to the same arms that are legal, widely owned, and generally available throughout the rest of the country.” *

[ Read the SemperVerus article, Discreet Body Armor for Self-Defense and Church Security ]

US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruling: Baird v. Bonta (January 2, 2026) by US Circuit Judge Lawrence VanDyke (pdf).

This ruling strikes down California’s open carry ban, finding it inconsistent with the Second Amendment and the nation’s tradition.

“For most of American history, open carry has been the default manner of lawful carry for firearms. It remains the norm across the country—more than 30 states generally allow open carry to this day, including states with significant urban populations. Indeed, several of our Nation’s largest cities and states recently returned to unlicensed open carry by explicitly authorizing it. For example, Texas reauthorized open carry without a license in 2021. Kansas likewise transitioned back to allowing open carry without a permit in 2015. And other states that placed restrictions on open carry in recent decades have also removed those burdens.”

“California’s ban on open carry in counties with a population greater than 200,000 (roughly 95% of the state’s population) is inconsistent with the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms as applied to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment. Applying the standard set forth in Bruen, the historical record makes unmistakably plain that open carry is part of this Nation’s history and tradition. It was clearly protected at the time of the Founding and at the time of the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment….There is no record of any law restricting open carry at the Founding, let alone a distinctly similar historical regulation.” *

USA State Constitutions Providing for Armed Self-Defense

According to the National Archives, “the USA Constitution might never have been ratified if the framers hadn’t promised to add a Bill of Rights. The first ten amendments to the Constitution gave citizens more confidence in the new government and contain many of today’s Americans’ most valued freedoms.” One of those is the Second Amendment:

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” THE BILL OF RIGHTS, AMENDMENT II

Get your free digital Guide to the Constitution from The Heritage Foundation.

[ Read the SemperVerus article, Important Judicial Decisions Regarding Self-Defense Law ]