Age 21 Law Blocked

I was always leery about RMGO and their actually legitimacy.

?Exceptions were provided for people in the United States armed forces or peace officers. The bill was challenged by the Rocky Mountain Gun Owners (RMGO) with two individuals plaintiffs in April, then amended in May. The RMGO and other plaintiffs asked for a preliminary injunction to prevent enforcement of the statute while the case is undergoing adjudication on July 7, 2023. Judge Philip A. Brimmer of the United States District Court for the District of Colorado issued the preliminary injunction on August 7, 2023. Judge Brimmer ruled the right to keep and bear arms necessarily included the right to acquire arms. He concluded there was no significant historical record of United States governments prohibiting 18-20-year-old people from acquiring arms. From the opinion:

Several courts have ruled that the right to keep arms necessarily includes a right to acquire arms. See, e.g., Teixeira v. County of Alameda, 873 F.3d 670, 677 (9th Cir. 2017) (?the core Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms for self-defense wouldn?t mean much without the ability to acquire arms? (quotations and citation omitted)); Ezell v. City of Chicago, 651 F.3d 684, 704 (7th Cir. 2011) (?The right to possess firearms for protection implies a corresponding right to acquire and maintain proficiency in their use.?); United States v. McNulty, ? F. Supp. 3d. ?-, 2023 WL 4826950, at *4 (D. Mass. July 27, 2023) (?The text of the Second Amendment itself also suggests that the right to ?keep? firearms necessarily includes an ability to purchase, sell, or otherwise transfer firearms in order to keep oneself properly armed.?); Renna v. Bonta, 2023 WL 2846937, at *7 (S.D. Cal. Apr. 3, 2023)(?t he right to keep arms, necessarily involves the right to purchase them.?), appeal filed, No. 23-55367 (9th Cir. 28 Apr. 20, 2023).

The Court agrees with the Individual Plaintiffs that the Second Amendment includes the right to acquire firearms and, therefore, protects the Individual Plaintiffs? proposed conduct. See Teixeira, 873 F.3d at 677; Ezell, 651 F.3d at 704. For purposes of a preliminary injunction, the Individual Plaintiffs have sufficiently demonstrated a likelihood of success in showing their proposed conduct is covered by the plain text of the Second Amendment.

The State of Colorado is prohibited from enforcing the statute while the case is being adjudicated.?

https://www.ammoland.com/2023/08/col...#axzz89tPVPmU2


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Given that RMGO actually accomplished something, I may reverse my self-imposed ban on donating to them.

O2

21 to buy a gun. 5 to have your genitals removed. WTF will they think of next.

DO NOT ANSWER THAT!