Worthwhile read on the defensive gun usage in Canton from a few days ago. https://t.co/Tu5T0OTDSk
District Court strikes NY's prohibition on Nunchaku. Yes, NY banned two sticks attached via chain or rope...
Notice of Appeal to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
"RED FLAG" - PETITION FOR EXTREME RISK PROTECTIVE ORDER (Public Safety Title 5, Subtitle 6)
District Court decision dismissing MSI's Takings Complaint
Attorney General Frosh's Maryland Defense Act 2017 Report
Frosh's AG Report on Maryland Defense Act of 2017
HQL suit. Plaintiffs' Motion for SJ and Opposition to the State's Motion for SJ
APPLICATION FOR AUTHORIZATION: All you have to do is print off this form, fill in the blanks and send it in to the ATF at the address indicated. To be safe, the ideal way to send it is via US Mail, return receipt requested. But by all means, send it any way you can (and keep a copy). Regardless how you send it, it must be sent before OCTOBER 1, 2018. Sending this letter does NOT mean that you are identifying yourself as owning a bump stock or any specific device. It just means that you (like we) don't know what is covered by the SB 707 ban on a "device" that "increases" the "rate of fire." The letter merely repeats the language set out in grandfather clause of SB 707. And note, even if you apply for "authorization" with the ATF, the prohibition imposed on possession by SB 707 kicks back in on October 1, 2019, if "authorization" is not actually received by that time. We already know that the ATF will not actually entertain such "applications" because it has publicly announced that it would not consider them. But that does not and will not matter until October 1, 2019. In the meantime, all you have to do is "apply" under the judge's ruling.
Motion for a Preliminary Injunction in Bump Stocks case
Order Setting Hearing on Motion
Motion for temporary and preliminary injunctions against enforcing SB707 to maintain the status quo pending a final resolution.
Opposition Takings Case filed 08/31/18
Motion to dismiss filed by the State in the Takings Case
Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit decision in Young v. Hawaii
Heller II decision