Stay Informed! Subscribe to MPN Newsletter: MyPatriotsNetwork.com/Newsletter
JOIN OUR PATRIOT MOVEMENTS!
Connect with fellow Patriots! Join FREE Today at PatriotsClub.com/MPN
Join the CSPOA Posse! Stand for Freedom with Constitutional Sheriffs! Sign up now at CSPOA.org/Join
SUPPORT US BY SUPPORTING OUR PARTNERS
Ready to Feel Younger? Get Your Health Back Today! Learn More at iWantMyHealthBack.com/MPN
Protect Yourself and Your Family Against 5G and EMF Radiation. Learn How at BodyAlign.com/MPN
Secure Your Assets with precious metals. Get Your Free Wealth Kit Today at BestSilverGold.com/MPN
Boost Your Business by Driving More Traffic, Leads and Sales. Start Today at MastermindWebinars.com/MPN
FOLLOW MY PATRIOTS NETWORK
Sovereign Radio: SovereignRadio.com/MPN
Rumble: Rumble.com/c/MyPatriotsNetwork
YouTube: Youtube.com/@MyPatriotsNetwork
Facebook: Facebook.com/MyPatriotsNetwork/
Instagram: Instagram.com/My.Patriots.Network/
X (formerly Twitter): X.com/mypatriots1776
Telegram: T.me/MyPatriotsNetwork
Summary
Transcript
Hey everybody welcome back to Guns and Gadgets where we bring you the latest in Second Amendment news and legal updates. Today we’re diving deep into a case that came out last night, a victory, Lara v. Paris. It’s a case that’s making big waves in the fight for gun rights especially for young adults aged 18 to 20. Before we get into the details make sure to hit the subscribe button and ring that bell down below so you don’t miss any of our updates. Let’s get started. Lara v. Paris involves a challenge to Pennsylvania’s gun laws that effectively prevent 18 to 20 year olds from carrying firearms in public during a state of emergency.
This case began when three young adults, Madison Lara, Sophia, Knepley and Logan Miller, along with two gun rights organizations, Second Amendment Foundation and Firearms Policy Coalition, sued the Pennsylvania State Police Commissioner arguing these restrictions violate the Second Amendment. This video is brought to you by Hidden Hybrid Holsters. They’re made over the hill in Ohio and they are the most comfortable I’ve ever worn which is why I’m wearing it today. Use the drop-down menus to dial it in for your personal firearm and carry all day comfortably which is key. They’re made with real Amish leather backers and top quality kydex up front that you can really carry all day long hidden and that’s what it’s all about.
Head on over to hiddenhybridholsters.com and tell them I sent you. Now this case revolves around three specific laws in Pennsylvania. Number one, you need a concealed carry license to carry a firearm in public. Number two, you must be 21 years old or older to get that license and number three, during a state of emergency open carry is also restricted unless you meet certain exceptions. Essentially these laws combined made it nearly impossible for most young adults to carry firearms legally. It is an unconstitutional aged based ban on a constitutionally guaranteed Indian and over right that we know is to keep and bear arms for the same adults that can carry a firearm in defense of their country but not when they’re at home.
The same adults who can vote, sign contracts, get loans, get married and much much more. The same age group that was vital in securing this nation’s independence. Now the journey of this case has been a roller coaster. It was originally filed in October of 2020 and initially the district court ruled against the plaintiff saying the restrictions were lawful but the Third Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed in early 2024 reversing that decision and ordering an injunction to stop enforcement of these laws against 18 to 20 year olds. We’ve been following this since it was filed here on this channel.
The plot thickened when the case went to the United States Supreme Court. After their decision in US versus Rahimi which upheld some firearm restrictions, the Supreme Court granted certiorari meaning we’re taking the case up, they vacated the Third Circuit’s ruling and remanded it back to the Third Circuit for consideration in light of Rahimi. This raised big questions about how the Second Amendment should be interpreted today. Let’s break down the legal arguments. The plaintiffs they argued that the Second Amendment’s reference to the people includes all adult Americans even those aged 18 to 20.
They cited historical context like the Militia Act of 1792 which required 18 year olds to be armed. Now on the other side Pennsylvania’s Commissioner of State Police argued that historical laws and traditions allowed states to regulate gun rights for younger adults. However most of their evidence comes from laws enacted decades after the Second Amendment was ratified. Remember Bruin said these regulations had to be consistent with this nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation at or around the time that the Second Amendment was adopted and ratified. Now the court had to decide whether to base its analysis on the Second Amendment’s original meaning in 1791 or the interpretation when the 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868.
Ultimately the Third Circuit reaffirmed its earlier decision siding with the plaintiffs and stating that these restrictions are not consistent with the principles of historical firearm regulation. Writing for the majority Circuit Judge Kent A. Jordan, a George W. Bush appointee noted, quote, it is undisputed that 18 to 20 year olds are among the people for other constitutional rights such as the right to vote, freedom of speech, the freedom to peaceably assemble and to petition the government, and the right against unreasonable searches and seizures. We therefore reiterate our holding that 18 to 20 year olds are like other subsets of the American people, presumptively among the people to whom Second Amendment rights extend.
Now Judge Jordan was joined by Judge D. Brooks Smith, another Bush appointee, and Judge L. Felipe Restrepo, a Barack Obama appointee, and he is the judge who dissented. It was a three-judge panel. Lara V. Parris is about more than just Pennsylvania. It’s part of a larger debate on how courts should interpret the Second Amendment. Do we stick strictly to the historical context of the 18th century or do we adapt those principles to modern times? Now Bill Sack, who’s my buddy over there at Second Amendment Foundation, he’s the director of legal operations, he said, Saf has maintained all along that 18 to 20 year olds are unquestionably part of the people contemplated by the Second Amendment who have the same rights to keep and bear arms that any other adult has.
The Third Circuit already agreed with us once, and today it reaffirmed its decision, finding that the Rahimi decision from the Supreme Court changes precisely nothing. Alan Gottlieb, Saf founder and executive vice president, said there is no language in the Second Amendment that applies only to some age-exclusive subset of the people. We’re delighted the Third Circuit once again has ruled in our favor and we will continue defending that position. Now this is not the only state that Saf and FPC have teamed up to go after these 18 to 20 year old age-based bans, and if you value your rights and you want to stay updated on critical Second Amendment cases like this, hit that subscribe button and share this video.
Together we can ensure that every American’s voice is heard in this ongoing fight for freedom. Thank you so much for watching and supporting Guns and Gadgets over the years. This is where we keep liberty alive. This is the new tavern of this country. This is where Americans and patriots can actually get real, real truth, real news. I’ll see you all next time. Stay free, America. [tr:trw].