Second Amendment Roundup: Rehearing En Banc Sought in 5th Circuit Suppressor Case
A petition for rehearing en banc has been filed seeking review of the Fifth Circuit’s panel decision in United States v. Peterson, which held that noise suppressors (aka silencers or mufflers) are not “Arms” protected by the Second Amendment. As I recently posted about the case here, the decision overlooked that millions of law-abiding Americans use suppressed firearms for ear protection and reduction of recoil, attributes just as relevant to the scope of the Second Amendment as other important firearm features.
The Court has ordered the United States to file a response by March 17. This is an opportunity for the Attorney General to comply with the President’s Executive Order to examine all actions of executive departments and to present a plan to protect the Second Amendment rights of Americans. That includes review of “The positions taken by the United States in any and all ongoing and potential litigation that affects or could affect the ability of Americans to exercise their Second Amendment rights.”
The Brief of the United States previously filed under Attorney General Garland is the familiar excuse list of why the Second Amendment never impedes any restriction: suppressors are not “bearable arms,” but even if they are, they are “dangerous and unusual,” but even if they’re not, the registration requirements of the National Firearms Act do not “infringe” on Second Amendment rights, and in any event, the registration requirements are analogous to historical regulation of commerce in firearms.
The same excuse list could be applied to any other firearm feature, including those that anti-gun advocates depict with exaggerated rhetoric to dupe judges who are unfamiliar with firearm technology. Such false depictions including the horrifying conspicuously-protruding pistol grip on a rifle, the devastating .223 caliber cartridge that blows up people to pieces, or the sniper scope designed to take out enemies two miles away.
The United States should file a response to the petition to rehear that addresses the very serious arguments made in the petition and should change the position of the Merrick Garland-run Department of Justice. It should acknowledge that suppressors reduce but do not eliminate the noise emitted from a firearm, which supports the safe and effective use of a firearm by reducing damage to one’s hearing. Millions of Americans possess and use suppressed firearms for target practice, self-defense, and hunting, which thus meet Heller‘s common-use
Article from Reason.com
The Reason Magazine website is a go-to destination for libertarians seeking cogent analysis, investigative reporting, and thought-provoking commentary. Championing the principles of individual freedom, limited government, and free markets, the site offers a diverse range of articles, videos, and podcasts that challenge conventional wisdom and advocate for libertarian solutions. Whether you’re interested in politics, culture, or technology, Reason provides a unique lens that prioritizes liberty and rational discourse. It’s an essential resource for those who value critical thinking and nuanced debate in the pursuit of a freer society.
