ReportWire

Tag: 2nd Amendment

  • Comparisons drawn between Alex Pretti, Kyle Rittenhouse in renewed Second Amendment debate

    [ad_1]

    Saturday’s fatal shooting of a man by a Border Patrol agent in Minneapolis has renewed a debate over the Second Amendment and concealed carry laws. But this time, the political roles are reversed.

    The right to bear arms has been a big Republican Party issue for decades. Conservative politicians have strongly defended the Second Amendment by successfully passing gun rights laws, such as concealed carry, in every state. Minneapolis shooting victim Alex Pretti was legally carrying a firearm. But top Trump administration officials say he did not have a right to do so.

    “You cannot bring a firearm loaded with multiple magazines to any sort of protest that you want. It is that simple,” said Director Kash Patel.

    However, President Donald Trump supported Kyle Rittenhouse after he shot and killed two men who tried grabbing his gun during protesters following a shooting involving police. Additionally, some Jan. 6 rioters were armed, and many Republicans supported a Missouri couple who pointed their firearms at protesters after George Floyd’s killing.

    Alex Pretti seen in bystander video Saturday morning in Minneapolis, left, and Kyle Rittenhouse at the Turning Point USA America Fest 2021 event Monday, Dec. 20, 2021, in Phoenix.

    (Bystander video)/(AP Photo/Ross D. Franklin)

    The killing spurred notable tension with the GOP’s long-standing support for gun rights. Officials say Pretti was armed, but no bystander videos that have surfaced so far appear to show him holding a weapon. The Minneapolis police chief said Pretti had a permit to carry a gun.

    Yet administration officials, including Noem and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, have questioned why he was armed. Speaking on ABC’s “This Week” Bessent said that when he has attended protests, “I didn’t bring a gun. I brought a billboard.”

    Such comments were notable for a party where support for the Second Amendment’s protection of gun ownership is foundational. Indeed, many in the GOP, including Trump, lifted Kyle Rittenhouse into prominence when the then-17-year-old former police youth cadet shot three men, killing two of them, during a 2020 protest in Wisconsin against police brutality. He was acquitted of all charges after testifying that he acted in self defense.

    In the wake of Pretti’s killing, gun rights advocates noted that it is legal to carry firearms during protests.

    “Every peaceable Minnesotan has the right to keep and bear arms – including while attending protests, acting as observers, or exercising their First Amendment rights,” the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus said in a statement. “These rights do not disappear when someone is lawfully armed.”

    In a social media post, the National Rifle Association said “responsible public voices should be awaiting a full investigation, not making generalizations and demonizing law-abiding citizens.”

    Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., who is often critical of the White House, said “carrying a firearm is not a death sentence.”

    “It’s a Constitutionally protected God-given right,” he said, “and if you don’t understand this you have no business in law enforcement or government.

    The second-ranking Justice Department official said he was aware of reports that Pretti was lawfully armed.

    “There’s nothing wrong with anybody lawfully carrying firearms,” Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said on “Meet the Press” on NBC. “But just make no mistake about it, this was an incredibly split-second decision that had to be made by ICE officers.”

    “The height of hypocrisy which continues out of the White House, scrambling to find some reason to show why these agents were justified,” said former Illinois House Republican Leader Jim Durkin.

    Durkin says the hypocrisy surrounding the Minneapolis case will continue to fracture the Republican Party. While it took over 20 years to pass a restricted concealed carry law in Illinois, residents have a right to carry a loaded firearm to a protest. Minnesota shares the same rights.

    “Mr. Pretti was not violating the law in terms of the Second Amendment. He had a protected right, and the law in Minnesota did not prohibit him from carrying a firearm,” said Rob Chadwick with the U.S. Concealed Carry Association.

    But Chadwick, a former FBI agent, says the law gets dicey if the armed person inserts themselves in a law enforcement operation. USCCA and a growing number of Republicans are calling for a full investigation into Pretti’s death.

    “When you take that step and get involved physically in a law enforcement action, it is incredibly dangerous and unintended consequences do happen,” Chadwick said.

    Meanwhile, White House Spokesperson Karoline Leavitt says Trump absolutely supports the Second Amendment for law-abiding Americans, but not for people who impede immigration enforcement operations.

    ABC Chicago Station WLS and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

    Copyright © 2026 KABC Television, LLC. All rights reserved.

    [ad_2]

    WTVD

    Source link

  • Walz’s gun plan wouldn’t stop shootings, but it might shred civil liberties

    [ad_1]

    Minnesota Democratic Gov. Tim Walz announced on Tuesday plans to hold a special legislative session to introduce new statewide gun control measures, including a ban on “assault weapons.” This comes in the wake of last week’s tragic mass shooting at Annunciation Catholic School in Minneapolis, which left 21 injured and 2 dead.

    Despite assurances that the proposals would not infringe upon Second Amendment rights, Walz’s proposed measures raise significant constitutional concerns. In addition to a ban, Walz proposed a law that would mandate stricter standards for safe storage, increased funding for mental health treatment, and further expansion of Minnesota’s 2023 red flag laws.

    The governor’s statements drew mixed reactions, mostly along partisan lines, with state Democrats largely supportive. Echoing Walz’s call, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, St. Paul Mayor Melvin Carter, and eight other city leaders urged repeal of Minnesota’s 1985 preemption statute, which bars local governments from enacting stricter gun laws than the state. Even if broader legislation fails, they insist cities must be able to act.

    State Republicans, despite expressing their willingness to work with Democrats to address gun violence, have predictably voiced skepticism toward the proposed measures, citing concerns about potential civil liberties violations, questioning the governor’s intentions, and ultimately doubting that a bipartisan resolution could be reached.

    Walz still seems willing to work with Republicans. But whatever kind of legislation the special session produces—particularly restrictions and/or local bans on common firearms—will likely face constitutional challenges if ratified. 

    The Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen established that all state and local-level gun regulations must align with firearm laws that were in place at the time of the Constitution’s framing. Since then, courts have overturned various state-level gun control laws, including bans on so-called “assault weapons,” for not reflecting that standard—among them, Illinois’ attempted prohibition of semiautomatic rifles and Tennessee’s ban on concealed carry in public parks.

    In Minnesota, these complexities extend further. The push to repeal the state’s preemption law—designed to prevent municipalities from passing stricter firearm ordinances than the state—would unravel decades of legal consistency, exposing residents to a fragmented landscape of local regulations and expanding the potential for municipal overreach. However, concerns over state overreach are not merely theoretical.

    Since red flag laws first emerged in 1999, civil liberties advocates have warned of due process erosion, as courts have authorized firearm seizures through ex parte orders with minimal evidentiary standards. In many cases, individuals lose their constitutional rights without being criminally charged or having a chance to dispute allegations. This lack of clarity can lead to deadly misunderstandings, as in 2018, when Maryland resident Gary Willis was killed by police while being served a red flag order issued without his knowledge. Extreme though it was, the case underscores how such laws can escalate risk and undermine core constitutional protections.

    Rather than address these deficiencies, Walz appears ready to double down, suggesting not only an expansion to his earlier red flag laws, but also broader state authority to disarm citizens based on subjective assessments of future risk. If the current trajectory continues, Minnesota may soon serve as a national test case for how far civil liberties can be curtailed in the name of safety.

    [ad_2]

    Jacob Swartz

    Source link

  • Prosecutors agree he shot a man in self-defense. They're still trying to put him in prison.

    Prosecutors agree he shot a man in self-defense. They're still trying to put him in prison.

    [ad_1]

    A New York City man is facing several years in prison after killing someone who’d broken into his apartment.

    But perhaps most interesting is that, at his arraignment last month, prosecutors did not dispute that LaShawn Craig acted in self-defense when he fatally shot Timothy Jones. Instead, they hit Craig with several charges related to the criminal possession of a weapon, because he did not have a license for the handgun he used to protect himself.

    On November 17, Craig, who has no criminal history, was standing outside his building talking to a neighbor when he heard his home alarm go off. After returning to his residence, he found Jones—wearing a mask and gloves—who, after Craig ordered him to leave, reached into his pocket. (It was later determined that he had a Taser.) Craig then fired several shots, after which he called 911.

    Law enforcement reportedly labeled the shooting a “justified homicide.” While obviously a tragic situation, that’s clearly the correct decision. Which also makes the government’s choice to prosecute him for criminal possession of a weapon, a violent felony, all the more preposterous. Put differently, Craig should spend years in prison, law enforcement says, not because he used his weapon improperly, but because he used it without first jumping through the barriers—which are both time consuming and financially burdensome—required to register a gun with the government.

    Craig is far from the first such defendant. This past summer, Charles Foehner, an elderly New York City man, shot a man attempting to mug him. Soon after, he learned that prosecutors would seek to have him die in prison. But it wasn’t because he hadn’t acted in self-defense. He had, the proof of which was caught on video. It was because police searched his apartment after the shooting and found that only some of his weapons were licensed with the government.

    Jones, whom Craig killed, reportedly had over 20 prior arrests for grand larceny, robbery, and domestic violence, among other convictions; Cody Gonzalez, whom Foehner killed, had at least 15 prior arrests. Neither Craig nor Foehner has a criminal record. And yet Foehner, if convicted on all charges, would go to prison for far longer than Gonzalez would have had he survived.

    Opposition to New York’s gun licensing scheme has, refreshingly, attracted some strange bedfellows. The 2022 Supreme Court ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen paralyzed parts of New York’s restrictive licensing rules governing concealed carry. Among those cheering that result: progressive attorneys.

    The year prior, The Black Attorneys of Legal Aid, The Bronx Defenders, and Brooklyn Defender Services submitted an amicus brief, asking the high court to incapacitate New York’s approach to concealed carry. As I wrote in June:

    They offered several case studies centered around people whose lives were similarly upended. Among them were Benjamin Prosser and Sam Little, who had both been victims of violent crimes and who are now considered “violent felons” in the eyes of the state simply for carrying a firearm without the mandated government approval. Little, a single father who had previously been slashed in the face, was separated from his family while he served his sentence at the Vernon C. Bain Center, a notorious jail that floats on the East River. The conviction destroyed his nascent career, with the Department of Education rescinding its offer of employment.

    Now LaShawn Craig will have to add his name to the unenviable list of people who used his gun to protect his life and was prosecuted for it anyway.

    [ad_2]

    Billy Binion

    Source link

  • Judge blocks New Mexico governor’s temporary ban on carrying guns in public in Albuquerque

    Judge blocks New Mexico governor’s temporary ban on carrying guns in public in Albuquerque

    [ad_1]

    Judge blocks New Mexico governor’s temporary ban on carrying guns in public in Albuquerque – CBS News


    Watch CBS News



    A federal judge Wednesday blocked an order from New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham that had suspended the right of private citizens to carry firearms on public property in Albuquerque and Bernalillo County. Grisham said the suspension was part of an effort to tackle rising gun violence. Lana Zak has more.

    Be the first to know

    Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.


    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Walmart shooter legally bought gun hours before killing

    Walmart shooter legally bought gun hours before killing

    [ad_1]

    Walmart shooter legally bought gun hours before killing – CBS News


    Watch CBS News



    The Chesapeake, Virginia, Walmart shooter legally purchased a 9mm handgun just hours before he killed his coworkers, police said. Kris Van Cleave reports.

    Be the first to know

    Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.


    [ad_2]

    Source link