Big Law Firms Target Your Second Amendment Rights


We have been celebrating what the election of Donald Trump means for the Second Amendment for about a month now. Well, folks, the gun-grabbers have regrouped, and have come up with a new way to go after our Second Amendment rights.

The New York Times was fawning over these announcements, many from high-powered law firms who charge $1,000 an hour for their services. The Brady Center is happy, with Avery Gardner, their top lawyer telling the Times, “With this new coalition, our bench just got deeper.” Also joining this anti-Second Amendment crusade is the Brennan Center for Justice out of New York University.

Here’s what this means for you: When it comes to those “gun-free zones” that have yet to stop a determined killer, now there is top-level talent trying to protect them. That is not the only set of plans though: As soon as next month, we could see “regulatory complaints” filed by these firms. In other words, they will be turning to bureaucrats to get what they have been unable to convince elected representatives to do.

On Facebook, Chuck Michel, a long-time Second Amendment supporter, noted that the firms “are politically beholden to politicians because of the municipal work” that big cities provide them. Michel also called for donation to the California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation’s litigation fund. Even then, they will likely be badly outgunned in a figurative sense.

The partners and other high-ranking attorneys at these powerful law firms make donations. But they are also very well connected to the business community and politicians. In short, we not only face very talented opposition, but they have the business and political connections to coordinate their assaults. Not to mention the fact that gains we have could be held up, or overturned by a judge. They could very well work to make it impossible to elect pro-Second Amendment judge in the jurisdictions that have judicial elections, or they can dominate the appointment process.

The sad fact of the matter is that between these big law firms doing pro bono work for the gun-grabbers and the financial backing of billionaires like George Soros and Michael Bloomberg, who are opposed to the Second Amendment, your local FFL holder will be in desperate straits if he ends up in their sights. So could the local shooting range, or the local manufacturer.

How so? Let’s look at one case that, while thrown out, shows what top talent could do across the country. Even though the Sandy Hook gunman stole the firearms he used in that tragic shooting, the gun store was still sued. The case got dismissed, as the judge used common sense, but the fees could still be staggering. One city’s failed effort to defend an ordinance that sought to regulate gun stores out of business still cost the National Shooting Sports Foundation and others over $400,000! How many people have that much dough lying around?

Furthermore, that top legal talent will be defending those efforts, and even if they fail, they will at least seek to deny the repayment of legal fees. All the while, they will flood their targets – or anyone who opposes their agenda – with motions, discovery requests, and delays. That costs money. The goal is the same as those lawsuits big cities were filing against gun manufacturers in the 1990s: To use litigation to render your Second Amendment rights a dead letter.

Now, more than ever, we need to stay vigilant. Our biggest enemy in these next eight years will be the complacency of ourselves and our friends, family, and fellow gun owners. In a sense, these announcements from the law firms are good news. It’s time to be ready to not only take the legislative offensive, but to fight the gun-grabbers’ litigation counter-offensive.

Go to Source