Supreme Court "Semi Auto" Cases, This Is The End

Подписаться 527 тыс.

Просмотров 48 тыс.

50% 1

We have a new development and an update today in regards to the PICA cases currently awaiting "cert" from the Supreme Court. These cases which have been pushed off for a month and a half now are once again going to have to wait even longer. The court has extended their session with a "clean up" conference that will have us waiting until next week at the earliest.
Check out Attorneys on Retainer for yourself, and use code CJTV during sign up to save 50 your individual signup fee. tribelink.co/CopperJacketAOR
Constitution Book - amzn.to/3KgRkSk
Social Media
INSTAGRAM - / thedailyshooter76
Check out my Merch, Shirts, Mugs and More!
teespring.com/dashboard/stores
NOTICE: I am "NOT" a lawyer, and this should not be considered legal advice. These are my opinions.
(DISCLAIMER: This post may contain paid advertisements or affiliate links. What is an affiliate link? It means that if you click on one of the product links, Copper Jacket TV will receive a small commission at no extra cost to you. This helps support the channel and allows awesome future content. Thank you for the support!
Disclaimer: These videos are strictly for educational and entertainment purposes only. . These videos are free to watch and if anyone attempts to charge for this video notify us immediately.

Опубликовано:

26 июн 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 326

@Spliner69 3 дня назад

When the 2nd Amendment was written all there was were military arms because ALL arms were military arms.

@Batmann_ 3 дня назад

Ok, thanks for this wonderful information. I'm not sure what I would've done without this. I'm sure posting this comment will also ensure the SCOTUS does a good job with these cases.

@elcajoia619 3 дня назад

@@Batmann_ How do stand on the issue?

@robertlawson698 3 дня назад

Based on that fact, we can conclude the gun banners want to ban the private possession of ALL firearms!

@Spliner69 3 дня назад

@@elcajoia619 I stand with the constitution. The 2nd Amendment is absolute. Only government will tell you it’s not, because they don’t want it to be. But that’s exactly why it was written in simple terms. Shall not be infringed means shall not be infringed. Only one justice on the bench today understands this. The rest only side with the constitution when it suits them.

@Batmann_ 3 дня назад

@@elcajoia619 I agree. I think a good ruling that throws out all these tests (dangerous & unusual, common use, military, etc), would be nice. Anyone can check and see this language was never part of the 2nd and is just nun cents that's been somehow integrated into things.

@user60521123 3 дня назад

We need Justice Thomas to author a majority opinion that makes it clear that banning any kind of firearm, component or accessory is an infringement. Also, if the state isn’t willing pay for law enforcement to make a public place secure then it isn’t a “special place” requiring a carry ban.

@x3dominator28 3 дня назад

If a state wont let its citizens have modern weapons, then their law enforcement shouldn’t either

@forgotten320 3 дня назад

Not just "secure" but "actively secure" with that being defined since states like California will say an area is secure, but won't have anyone there or nearby

@hanelyp1 3 дня назад

@@x3dominator28 Indeed, Citizen rights to any arms similar to what police use. Anything else would be a title of nobility, violating Article 1 Section 10 (state) or 9 (federal).

@treversmith8626 2 дня назад

Even if the state can pay for law enforcement, who cares? The point of the second was so that we can defend ourselves and not HAVE to rely on the state at all. I could have a cop trail me like a secret service agent and I wouldn't be convinced I wouldn't have a reason to carry as well. Literally just had Bidens security get disarmed. 😂

@user-qx3uu7sq2r День назад

@@hanelyp1 Anything routinely issued to common soldiers.

@xterminator8514 2 дня назад

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED !!! PERIOD. THEY CAN GO POUND SAND…

@Ss123brolly1 2 дня назад

Granted a regular everyday normal guy has the right to say their opinion, but as soon as something present in an official capacity to make an attempt...

@scotthajney4127 3 дня назад

"Tying up loose ends" automatically gives me visions of Hillary

@patman7421 3 дня назад

Kavanaugh and Barrett are very big disappointments. It is a useless situation.

@SL1CK1307 3 дня назад

Stay in the fight

@PoliticallyInsensitive 3 дня назад

You're only disappointed because you put misplaced trust in them

@rickluttrell5529 3 дня назад

Indeed. I think they are followers, not leaders and unfortunately they seem to be following Roberts, who is weak and political.

@aquariumdude7829 3 дня назад

Trump should never have listened to that Rino McConnell!

@AlvesHeim 3 дня назад

Thanks Trump

@stevelyons2744 3 дня назад

"Dragging their feet"? You nailed it, brother. The SCrOTUmS had around 200 cases in the 1970s. Now they're lucky to get 80 per year. Pay them by the case and watch the decisions flow.

@daltonnettleton3968 3 дня назад

SCOTUS is a waste of time

@svbarryduckworth628 3 дня назад

Weak Tea.

@ij2750 3 дня назад

I agree and when enough people realize this something can start to be done to gain proper 2A rights in this nation.

@taasch2505 3 дня назад

@@ij2750let's be honest, gun owners will stand down in the end. They are proving it everyday

@alaefarmestatesllc 3 дня назад

@@ij2750will never happen. Males in America, especially gun toting males have been castrated. It’s a real shame.

@waynej9238 3 дня назад

People thinking the government really cares about their 2A is a waste of time.

@jaytackett6545 3 дня назад

MIRANDA VS ARIZONA NO LEGISLATION NO RULEMAKER NO CONGRESS NO SCOTUS CAN TAKE AWAY ANYONE RIGHTS

@DonaldWheelis-xb1lu 3 дня назад

Not true the Vet Adm can and does everyday.

@PBerBlueCobra 3 дня назад

True, felons should have their gun rights.

@PBerBlueCobra 3 дня назад

@@DonaldWheelis-xb1lu legally they cant.

@aquariumdude7829 3 дня назад

Dude, would you please come back to reality! They are doing exactly that, whether you agree with it or not!

@JP-wc8ky 3 дня назад

They'll just 'kick the can' AGAIN.

@stubeast4031 3 дня назад

SCOTUS should be changed to SCROTUM

@harrisonmantooth7363 3 дня назад

stubeast ; Nah, they don't have any.

@americanpatriot6918 3 дня назад

SCROTUS!!😂🤣😭👍

@garypascucci5797 3 дня назад

They're already there. Have been...

@i-v-l9335 3 дня назад

I nominate you for best joke said in the comment section

@brucegomez025 3 дня назад

Supreme Court needs to adjudicate all 2A case to stop the lower courts shenanigans and deliberate political manipulation!

@aquariumdude7829 3 дня назад

But they won't.

@investigativeoutcomes9343 2 дня назад

the entire government has been weaponized against you. why do you keep thinking that any part of the government is on your side?

@gunnutbikenut6939 3 дня назад

These cowards will screw us over we all know it

@tml721 3 дня назад

IF these weapons aren't covered by the Constitution then neither would be .9 mill or .45's !!

@eugenecbell 3 дня назад

Yes, they are covered.

@tml721 2 дня назад

@@eugenecbell I'm saying these anti gun governments will try and say they're not

@investigativeoutcomes9343 2 дня назад

what are you confused about, they are weaponizing the law to disarm you, it's that simple.

@generaldecay8163 3 дня назад

They don’t have the guts to put their foot down. This will just go on and on without any real changes.

@danielguy2156 3 дня назад

Evwry weapon the military has should be available to the public...period

@timfremstad3434 3 дня назад

They are......to gangs and cops

@aquariumdude7829 3 дня назад

Dude, no sane person is going to allow you to have access to weaponized anthrax and fissionable plutonium. Be reasonable!

@aquariumdude7829 10 часов назад

No, sorry, dude. Ordinary civilians should definitely not have access to weaponized anthrax or fissionable plutonium. There are sane limits.

@FreedomKat 3 дня назад

SCOTUS is not going to help us...Period.

@rickluttrell5529 3 дня назад

No. They are not. Just another political government bureaucracy.

@aquariumdude7829 3 дня назад

Of course not. I've been saying that for over a year now.

@mexicanwhitedevil386 3 дня назад

Don't hold your breath that the Supreme Court will follow the Constitution TRUMPS three picks were a total waste of picks and as much as I like him and are still going to vote for him it's his fault for listening to whoever he did about these three Justices. LONG LIVE THE HONORABLE JUSTICE THOMAS !!!!!!

@chesslover8829 3 дня назад

St. Thomas!

@i-v-l9335 2 дня назад

Im gonna just politely disagreee on the Trump nominees. This specific bench generally has few disagreements with each other. I have never seen a SCOTUS have so many unanimous or near-unanimous decisions that all topically different. You're always get some decisions you don't agree with, but to underestimate the large shake ups this bench has caused is a mistake. This is the bench that will destroy Chevron deference.

@chesslover8829 3 дня назад

The Supreme Court will not act.

@backfromthedead553 3 дня назад

I have a multitude of doubts.

@outdoorchronicles2329 3 дня назад

Let me guess, nothing changed whatsoever. I’m shocked

@timswinscoe2895 3 дня назад

JP Prickster is last pile of stuff that should be in office

@rudistout1086 3 дня назад

I live in Illinois you are being nice describing him like that.

@timswinscoe2895 2 дня назад

@@rudistout1086 RU-vid didn’t like my original comment. I had a clean it up. I can’t stand that ####

@youknow9092 3 дня назад

200,000 stun guns were considered by the Supreme Court to be used enough by civilians to be classified as “common use” giving them 2A protection in Caetano, I dont get anyone who claims 200 million is not commonly used thus protected.

@i-v-l9335 3 дня назад

Thank you, This case is the hardest one for me to remember but it does have one of the top pro 2A decisions.

@zodaguado6655 2 дня назад

But in caetano, scotus never said banning them was unconstitutional, they just said the reasoning mass scotus used was borderline frivolous…. All Massachusetts had to do was use intermediate scrutiny and convict caetano with the scotus reasoning…. Mass just came to a conclusion with caetano and the case was scrapped, but they never ruled on the constitutionality I believe

@youknow9092 2 дня назад

@@zodaguado6655 in Castano the court vacating the Massachusetts Courts ruling stating, “the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding". They stated the term “bearable arms” was any“weapon of offence" or "thing that a man wears for his defence, or takes into his hands," that is "carried . . . for the purpose of offensive or defensive action." Second, the Massachusetts court said that stun guns were "dangerous per se at common law and unusual" because they were "a thoroughly modern invention", but the Supreme Court held that this was also inconsistent with Heller. Third, the Massachusetts court said that stun guns could be banned because they were not "readily adaptable to use in the military", but the Supreme Court held that Heller rejected the argument that "only those weapons useful in warfare" were protected by the Second Amendment.

@MGAC1701 3 дня назад

Nothing will change.

@jasonczfan8658 3 дня назад

In all seriousness, why did you ever think they were going to take one of these cases? They do not want to deal with “assault weapons”.

@FatasFrying 3 дня назад

They Will Have to Eventually!

@jasonczfan8658 3 дня назад

@@FatasFrying they don’t have to. They get to pick and choose what cases to hear.

@thestew57 3 дня назад

@@jasonczfan8658 This is what everyone forgets. They do not have to hear a case they dont want too, nor do they care. It will take 5 judges who truly want to look at the case. currently you have maybe 3 judges at most that this is a core topic

@relicpathfinder2800 3 дня назад

@@jasonczfan8658 As soon as the majority are leftist judges they'll hear them all.

@Batmann_ 3 дня назад

And how does your DA know that they don't want to deal with them? If they really didn't want to, why didn't they just deny them? Maybe you DFs should stop presenting your speculative conjecture/opinions as fact. If they finally get to them and then just flat out deny, then we can complain. When we still don't know what they're doing with them, maybe ufts.

@waynewilson4269 3 дня назад

Computers , radio and TV won't be covered either

@free-dom5536 3 дня назад

Thank you for always giving us the heads up and watching the dockets/courts for some of the quickest news/info on the web! I, and many others, really appreciate what you do to help spread the 2A word!

@TheHarleywolf 3 дня назад

The SCOTUS has their heads up their asses. Go to the doctor then rule on one of these cases.

@dinadaughtry8993 3 дня назад

They need to define temporary when it comes to the government being able to disarm someone

@krayziebread27 3 дня назад

I appreciate all the updates and info as well as the consistency of your content. You are a valuable asset to the 2A community.

@marcofguzman3075 3 дня назад

They are definitely playing with the right of the people 😮

@hoapres 2 дня назад

I don't expect the Supreme Court to take another 2nd Amendment case until a clear circuit break happens in the appellate courts

@jpjp3873 День назад

Seems like they don’t want the weight of these kinds of decisions on their shoulders.

@BadHorsie2 День назад

The case will get booted.

@victorhauk5973 3 дня назад

Hey, Supreme Court, just throw the Constitution out the window. Be all judicious and completely miss the intent of our Constitution, which is to define the relationship between the people and the government. And if this document becomes invalid then citizenship is dead. Thanks guys

@Batmann_ 3 дня назад

Oh, did they make some decision here? Or are you just another DA making a DA comment as if they have?

@victorhauk5973 3 дня назад

@@Batmann_ the lack of a decision is a decision. Assault weapon bans and lack bans are patently unconstitutional. The federal courts are giving the Supreme Court the finger. And they are concerned the the state A G doesn’t have standing when his job is to stand for the people? Whatever

@Batmann_ 3 дня назад

@@victorhauk5973 The lack of decision is EXACTLY that, not a decision yet. When something actually happens, THEN complain (if applicable). Until then, you're just looking like a DF. I mean, complain that they've not done anything with these yet and seem to be taking their time. That's a valid complaint. "Blah blah blah they ignored the constitution blah blah blah" about something they've made no decision on...is just FnRtdd.

@victorhauk5973 3 дня назад

@@Batmann_ maybe. Or it’s procrastination to taste which way the wind blows. After living in America for over 70 years, with 10 years in service to the Constitution, I have never felt farther from it.

@Batmann_ 3 дня назад

@@victorhauk5973 It certainly could be procrastination. Hard to say what it truly is, from the outside.

@dmcgill8978 3 дня назад

If they surprise court is afraid they're cowards. I don't want taxes funding cowards to tell the rest of us what to do

@Ruby_Sterling 3 дня назад

If saying “ef these people” is saying “ef the law” then ef em

@Loyce-e9w 3 дня назад

I'm continually inspired by the willingness of participants to listen and learn from one another. It's a model for constructive dialogue.🍒

@bourbonwarrior1618 3 дня назад

Thank you very much for the update!

@LordKegger76 3 дня назад

Thank you for your tireless labors.

@barkermjb 3 дня назад

Thanks for update William

@jaytackett6545 3 дня назад

THEY WILL NOT BE BACK.

@franciscotapia2781 3 дня назад

Thanks for the update sir

@SL1CK1307 3 дня назад

Thanx for the info my dude

@michaelball760 3 дня назад

Supreme court will punt it back down again. Its just and endless cycle that will never change

@Billbillbill441 2 дня назад

Thanks

@juanalvarez4309 3 дня назад

Oh boy

@2A_Patriot 2 дня назад

If they GVR these, that will add YEARS to reach closure. The 7th circuit will drag their feet as long as possible since they’re in the Governor’s back pocket.

@shaunpotts2990 7 часов назад

Shall not be infringed means just that. They will never be touching any of my toys, PERIOD.

@professional_larper 2 дня назад

*Doooont get your hopes up*

@bobhoward9016 3 дня назад

I always appreciate copper jacket and the tone of discourse. Thank you.

@u.s.aarchangelforgod3679 3 дня назад

TY Cooper Jacket for all your 2A new

@Ironsightmike 2 дня назад

I just screen recorded it for proof but the like button is gone on this video. I always like every pro 2A video I come across.

@alexanderstordeur9434 3 дня назад

This is the end as we know it. This is the end as we know it, and I feel fiiiiiiiiinnnnnnnnnneeee....

@aquariumdude7829 3 дня назад

Good song. 😊

@michaelpalus7929 3 дня назад

There will never be an END!!!!!

@aquariumdude7829 3 дня назад

Nope. Never.

@investigativeoutcomes9343 2 дня назад

your government is controlled by 🇮🇱 and 🇨🇳

@retiefgregorovich810 2 дня назад

I wonder if this is an election year issue. Maybe they don't want to address this until after the election?

@acurtis7 2 дня назад

Summary: there is no update

@joelatkinson2080 2 дня назад

Another great video!!!

@Rottluver425 2 дня назад

I believe that SCOTUS said a day or two ago that they've extended their session for another month or so. It's unusual but it does happen

@seangray9459 3 дня назад

Thanks for the update. We all appreciate your work, and like me, most 2A supporters rely heavily on "gun tubers" like you to keep us informed. Many thanks.

@imahoare4742 3 дня назад

Nothing ever happens.

@kellywelch3 2 дня назад

None of these cases should have anything to do with Rahimi.

@garysnyder6020 3 дня назад

Some time no news is good news.

@sonofawwiivet8336 2 дня назад

Closer to the truth the darker the $......

@jw546 2 дня назад

A Ruger 10/22 is "too similar to military weapons?" Huh...

@vicdiaz5180 3 дня назад

No, it’s not the end! Mark from the 4 boxes diner explained about a case out of Michigan that has to do with so-called assault weapons that has a totally different angle of argument that just might make it to the Supreme Court

@corywilliamsmith 3 дня назад

Yup just watched that one

@UnregisteredSkeptic 3 дня назад

@@corywilliamsmithCan you post the link please?

@ericsfishingadventures4433 3 дня назад

Yeah he's the best go to for the legal aspects involving the 2nd amendment, but I like getting updates from multiple sources that stay on top of it if I can.

@ericsfishingadventures4433 3 дня назад

@@UnregisteredSkepticyt doesn't like it, just search "4 boxes diner"

@rflett5797 3 дня назад

There is still hope with the Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo ruling as at least it will severely neuter the AFT, along with other federal agencies, while another semi-auto case can make it to the Supreme Court in about 5 years.

@Fletch001 3 дня назад

The closer they are to the military the more protected they should be. In fact IMO the NFA is Unconstitutional.

@x3dominator28 3 дня назад

I believe they need to take it given the volume of infringement going on.😊

@cooltraineraaron4618 3 дня назад

Like, I think it's pretty clear that uncommon and unusual would be focusing on things like artillery, bio/chem weapons ,explosives, missiles that can or cannot carry nukes (I'm pretty sure missiles are artillery). I also think determining "what is common" should also consider what a potential threat that you may come across would commonly have as well. I believe that any of us, even those that want to fight to take these inalienable rights away, should be able to defend themselves in an adequate and efficient way. Having a rifle in a rifle fight vs bringing a pistol is going to greatly impact the outcome.

@jamesfrankiewicz5768 3 дня назад

"Ordnance" is the word that you are looking for that encompasses bombs, missiles, rockets, artillery, tank rounds, naval gun rounds, mortars, grenades, mines, torpedoes, demolition charges, and most ammunition larger than .50 BMG. Note that there is no "i" in spelling of "ordnance"; if you misspell it with the "i", you get the word for a law created by city government.

@aquariumdude7829 3 дня назад

Okay, your assessment sounds reasonable. I agree with you. 😊

@cooltraineraaron4618 2 дня назад

@@jamesfrankiewicz5768 ah thank you, was unaware of that, thank you

@tanglediver 3 дня назад

Here go this wet blanket. Have a nice day!

@robertbobby2410 3 дня назад

The president is pissed off he may get rid of the supreme Court that's not very nice

@leskobrandon4666 3 дня назад

They have to check with President Potato first. Don't hold your breath!

@robsnizzle7 3 дня назад

President POTATO, isn't running the show we ALL KNOW THAT....

@leskobrandon4666 3 дня назад

@@robsnizzle7 Agreed 💯

@uscscjohnson 3 дня назад

Another informative video. Those shredding Kavanaugh and Barrett need to take a breath. The Court's reluctance to take up major political issues during election cycles is THE primary characteristic of the Robert's court.

@wendysbaconator1175 2 дня назад

Save your time, don’t bother watching the video. SCOTUS is extending their session and it will use clean up time till Monday to see if we get our cases heard.

@paulthompson8649 3 дня назад

On one hand they say the 2A only applies to the weapons used back when the constitution was written, when civilians had identical weapons to the military. Then on the other they say, AR15’s are too similar to the weapons used in today’s military. So which is it?

@i-v-l9335 2 дня назад

The misapplication of constitutional mechanics best shown by the 2A restrictors because they completely ignore the Patent System created also in the Constitution. THe Constitution created the philosophy of law evolving over time in conjunction with technology evolution.

@richbutler7828 День назад

The Left Always want's things both ways. So they can always be right.

@aquariumdude7829 3 дня назад

Dude, why don't you wait until something actually happens before you get all excited about it either way?

@tommcqueen3145 2 дня назад

👍👍

@kennethnewton1070 3 дня назад

I am still holding out hope. Tomorrow they drop Chevron deference and Monday they accept cert of an interlocutory case. Since it's my dream, we get a merits decision on the 18th of July. ❤

@mattburgett7367 3 дня назад

They already said these cannot be banned period screw them don't comply

@TRUTHBYFACT-hd8rs 3 дня назад

Something is greater on the docket????

@chrismitchell2272 2 дня назад

What do you think about the Supreme Court ruling about the Chevron deference and how it will affect gun cases? Thanks for your great videos!!!

@chrislarson5100 3 дня назад

The scotus has no balls…

@steeeeve86 3 дня назад

SCOTUS already ruled that arms suitable for military/militia service are protected by the 2nd Amendment. They did so 85 years ago in US v. Miller.

@aquariumdude7829 3 дня назад

There are sane limits though. No sane person is going to agree that you have the right to weaponized anthrax or fissionable plutonium.

@steeeeve86 3 дня назад

@aquariumdude7829 well, now that you've given an apples vs oranges argument...care to add something of value?

@aquariumdude7829 3 дня назад

@steeeeve86 Dude, my point is if we are going to win voters over to our point of view, we need to sound sane and reasonable. If we do that, maybe we can actually win some elections.

@chrissmalley83 3 дня назад

US v. Miller: "Short-barreled shotguns aren't protected, because they have no military application." Illinois: "AR-pattern rifles aren't protected, because they are only suitable for military application." They can both be wrong, but they can't both be right.

@acme9538 3 дня назад

And here I thought we'd see some positive news from SCOTUS with the Trump apointees. Meh.

@jhondoe6735 2 дня назад

Ok I give up

@dansmith3507 3 дня назад

Supreme Court is absolutely gone to complete 🐴🚽🪠

@andrewmathurin684 3 дня назад

The Supreme Court Justices don't want too much controversy talk to you that's why they will not get rid of these bans whether we like it or not

@MrReman2u 3 дня назад

@ 2:29 - To say that semi-automatic are not protected by the Second Amendment because they are too similar to what the military has is asinine. When the Second Amendment was written and put into law, they were exactly protecting the very same weapons for civilian procurement that the military had at that time. As far as I'm concerned, the 7th circus shot themselves in their own clown foot!

@josedelao9925 3 дня назад

it's sound like the 9th circuit doesn't there starting to be like all the other court

@zeusmaster6379 3 дня назад

Just keep kickin’ that can down the road don’t they…..

@scottmiller4516 3 дня назад

My guess: they won"t touch them!

@briansmith2616 3 дня назад

Someone is writing a dissent for the cases not being granted cert is my opinion.

@jasonmcquown1342 3 дня назад

Punt ???

@corybrown738 2 дня назад

Chief Justice John Roberts doing his cabal part and slow walking a 2A case. Surprise!!!!

@josephmorgan4388 3 дня назад

Lifetime retirement job!

@bruceparis9968 День назад

disbar the judges who declare the 2a unconstutional, government officials who try to remove the 2a as unconstutional under the color of law, prosicuite .

@aquariumdude7829 10 часов назад

Dude, we have to win some elections first before we can do anything.

@brentgilbert4208 3 дня назад

What does GBR stand for? Thanks!

@KP-Pro2A 3 дня назад

Grant, vacate, and remand In other words, they cancel the lower courts previous ruling and send it back to them to re-decide the case properly. One way to look at it is like the Supreme Court telling the lower court you did it wrong, do it over again sometimes exciting what language they want the lower court to consider in their new decision . Hope that helps.

@Badger77722 3 дня назад

GVR - Grant, Vacate, Remand. Grant certiorari (usually called "granting cert", meaning that SCOTUS has reviewed the verdict of the lower court), Vacate the lower court's ruling in the case (because they think the lower court did something wrong), and Remand the case back to the lower court for a do-over, often giving some instructions about what they think the lower court did incorrectly.