The SCOTUS Suppressor Decision

The SCOTUS Suppressor Decision

Gun Rights

The firearm accessories are not "silencers" as the Leftmedia insist on reporting. The Supreme Court declined to take up an interesting gun case on Monday, and the Leftmedia, as usual, is peddling fake news about it. More on that in a minute. But first, this was not exactly the best case for any gun-rights proponent to push to the level of the Supreme Court. National Review reports the details: “The appeal came from Shane Cox, who owns a military-surplus store in Kansas, and Jeremy Kettler, who purchased a gun suppressor from him. The men were convicted under the [1934] National Firearms Act of failing to register the device but appealed the decision, saying the law infringes on their Second Amendment rights. The appeals court then ruled that a suppressor is not a ‘bearable’ weapon protected under the Second Amendment.” However, the specifics are a bit murkier: “Kettler said he bought the suppressor to avoid further harm to his hearing, which was damaged while he served in the military. He said Cox had led him to believe that suppressors made and sold in the same state were not required to be registered.” Now, we’d be the first to agree with Justice Clarence Thomas, who has in recent years complained that SCOTUS has ignored Second Amendment jurisprudence to the point of making it a second-class right . But breaking the law and then demanding it be overturned by the courts is not the strongest approach. Moreover, this is about accessories, not […]

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.