I'm not sure how I feel about today's decision in Rahimi. On the one hand, I understand why the court wants to restrain people like Rahimi from firearms possession.
On the other hand, I tend to agree with Justice Thomas in his dissenting opinion. The court bent over backwards to find a way to make our history and tradition of firearms regulation fit this specific case - which it really doesn't. Unfortunately, that tees up lower courts to do the same sort of thing.
Still, I was pleased to read the concurring opinions of Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Coney Barrett. I think they did a very good job of instructing lower courts in the manor in which they must decide 2A cases and circumscribing the outer limits within which lower courts must function. Hopefully, these efforts will restrain lower courts from following the fuzzy example demonstrated in this case.
I urge you to read the decision and form your own opinion. I'll have a detailed interview with a constitutional attorney to discuss the case next week.
In the first half, attorney Sean Maloney from Second Call Defense joins me to explain the lessons gun owners can learn from what happened to Kyle Rittenhouse.
In the second half, I discuss a home invasion case from Oceanside California in which the homeowner successfully defended himself.
