Fourth Circuit Issues Anti-AR15 Diatribe in the Walker Case

Congratulations to West Virginia’s first Second Amendment “Sanctuary,” Putnam County, in obtaining a new anti-gun diatribe of a published opinion from the Fourth Circuit. This morning, the Fourth Circuit issued a published opinion in the Walker case. Basically, the Second Amendment doesn’t apply to the AR-15, and it matters not that the WV legislature allows its citizens to possess and use AR-15s, because the judiciary decides what peasants may possess – not the state legislature.

I knew it was going to be bad, since at the oral arguments one of the judges likened the AR-15 to the M-16. And he ended up authoring the opinion. You can listen to the oral arguments here, if you missed them.

Join me live at 7pm for a discussion on the ruling:

5 thoughts on “Fourth Circuit Issues Anti-AR15 Diatribe in the Walker Case

  1. Next stop the Supreme Court.sooner or later those paperweights are gonna have to issue a ruling.

  2. Pingback: The Captain's Journal » Fourth Circuit Goes On A Diatribe Against AR-15s

  3. Mr. Bryan,

    I’m a native West Virginian, moved to Tennessee, where I now practice criminal defense law. I have a couple of thoughts about the Walker case. I’d love to discuss the case with you if you have time. I’ll leave my contact info.

    1. Although it’s tough to pick the “most disturbing” aspect of what I consider to be a pile of garbage opinion, I have to say that what I found the most troublesome is the fact that the court basically carved out a pathway for jurists in the 4th circuit to relive officers of ever using critical thought in articulating their RAS. The court proceeded to make excuses for the officer as it relates to reasonable suspicion.

    Does the A in RAS no longer mean that the officer has to be able to ARTICULATE—objectively, their reasons for detaining people? The idea that you have indisputable evidence that Cpl. Donahoe (whom I’ve interacted with personally, and who has always been an egomaniac, as he showed the rest of the world here) stating that his pretext for the stop was not even in the same universe as the court’s reasons underlying their reasonable suspicion argument, boggles the mind.

    A second confusion that I can’t seem to get past is the fact that this same panel just struck down the 21 year old age limit on handgun sales. In one opinion, they openly dispense with the notion that AR15s are anything other than weapons or murder, mass casualty, and war. In the other case, they appear to be strong advocates of the 2A.

    They can’t seem to decide what they’re doing.

    I enjoy your YT channel and following your work. Good luck

    • Thanks James. There is a disparity here between how the Court has treated individuals under the RS standard, based on their skin color unfortunately. That’s something I’m going to point out in the petition for rehearing I’m working on.

Leave a Reply