Bondi's DOJ Defends 1934 Gun Law, Clashing With Trump's Pro-2A Agenda In Suppressor Case
Posted by freedomforall 2 days, 13 hours ago to Government
Excerpt:
"The Department of Justice under Attorney General Pam Bondi is defending one of the most outdated and constitutionally suspect gun control measures still on the books: the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA) and its restrictions on suppressors. In the Peterson case, now before the Fifth Circuit, DOJ has argued that NFA gun registration and other restrictions are valid despite acknowledging that suppressors fall within the Second Amendment’s protections.
The facts are simple. Peterson involved an individual who possessed an unregistered suppressor for home defense. Suppressors are widely used for lawful purposes: reducing noise at firing ranges, protecting hearing during hunting, and improving safety during home defense. With more than 3.5 million legally registered suppressors in the United States today, ATF data shows they are rarely used in crimes. In fact, there are fewer than 50 federal prosecutions annually involving suppressors.
By any objective measure, suppressors are in “common use” for lawful purposes."
---------------------------------------------
D.C. NIFO
"The Department of Justice under Attorney General Pam Bondi is defending one of the most outdated and constitutionally suspect gun control measures still on the books: the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA) and its restrictions on suppressors. In the Peterson case, now before the Fifth Circuit, DOJ has argued that NFA gun registration and other restrictions are valid despite acknowledging that suppressors fall within the Second Amendment’s protections.
The facts are simple. Peterson involved an individual who possessed an unregistered suppressor for home defense. Suppressors are widely used for lawful purposes: reducing noise at firing ranges, protecting hearing during hunting, and improving safety during home defense. With more than 3.5 million legally registered suppressors in the United States today, ATF data shows they are rarely used in crimes. In fact, there are fewer than 50 federal prosecutions annually involving suppressors.
By any objective measure, suppressors are in “common use” for lawful purposes."
---------------------------------------------
D.C. NIFO
