SAF

Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) is a non-profit working to restore, defend, and expand 2nd Amendment rights through litigation. #2A

[Kostas Moros @MorosKostas]

Thread done on both briefs here. It's long, enjoy.

One last thing to note. Cook County argues repeatedly that AR15s are bad for self-defense, and pistols are better for that purpose.

Chicago argued exactly the OPPOSITE in defending its handgun ban in McDonald (another SAF case!). From their briefing in that case:

[SAF @2AFDN]

@davekopel Support SAF:

https://t.co/fEqae8koDV

[SAF @2AFDN]

Cook County and Connecticut have just filed their briefs in Viramontes and Higgins.

This thread will look at the Cook County brief first. To the extent the Connecticut brief differs in substance, we'll cover that here too.

[SAF @2AFDN]

@davekopel This was basically a better-written version of the Cook County brief, but loaded with the same huge problems and some new ones not present in that other brief.

Excited for our reply brief and oral argument!

[SAF @2AFDN]

@davekopel A lot of antigunner court arguments are, at their core, just exasperation that the Second Amendment is a right that says it shall not be infringed.

Yes, that does make it hard for the government to do certain forms of gun control. That's the whole point!!!

[SAF @2AFDN]

A clever argument (Prelogar is good, no doubt about that!), but the reason stun gun bans are not constitutional is also because they are not *dangerous* relative to other weapons around today, regardless of their popularity.

It's dangerous AND unusual. If the arm is commonly owned for lawful purposes, it can't be unusual. If it is not dangerous relative to other common arms, then it is not "dangerous" for the purposes of the test if it is to have any meaning (because all weapons are dangerous, that's the whole point).