Case name is US v. William Robert Shepherd, III. Case number is 24-60622.

Background

Per the Defendant’s motion to suppress and US’s opposition to the MTS, on August 2, 2022, Defendant was driving a 2007 Honda Accord with a cargo carrier with no wheel or taillights attached to the Accord’s receiver hitch on the Natchez Trace Parkway. A seemingly brand new and unused wheelbarrow was tethered to the carrier per the Defendant’s MTS Exhibit. At approximately 8:34 AM, Natchez Trace Park Ranger Richard Perry pulled him over in violation of 36 CFR 7.43(c)(5), which concerns about the use of trailers. Perry then immediately smelled marijuana coming from the inside. Defendant then provided his driver’s license but couldn’t find his valid proof of insurance. Perry then inquired on whether there were firearms and illegal substances in the vehicle, to both of which the Defendant answered in the negative. Ranger Perry then asked Defendant to step out of the car and to the rear, which the latter complied, and after receiving consent to search his person and conducting the search per the US, Ranger Perry informed Defendant that he will search the car due to the marijuana’s odor. In there, Perry found a “blunt” of marijuana and a “sawed off shotgun” beside the passenger car seat. Perry also found a black bag with a glass pipe inside, and found a black container with approximately 0.79 grams of suspected marijuana. On a side note, Defendant stated that he smoked crystal meth earlier on that day.

Judicial Proceedings

Per the indictment, Defendant possessed an unserialized short-barreled Stevens, model 820B, 12 gauge shotgun that wasn’t registered to him in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record. What’s interesting is that given his usage of crystal meth that day and some drugs found in his car, he wasn’t indicted under 18 USC § 922(g)(3).

Defendant then moved to dismiss the indictment by saying that the NFA as applied to SBSs violated 2A facially and as applied to him. Specifically, he challenges the registration requirement, and that he claims that there are no historical analogues of permanently deprive one of 2A rights for just failing to register even if registration is consistent with the historical tradition of firearm regulation.

Defendant then talks about the history of the NFA and cites Stephen Halbrook’s article Congress Interprets the Second Amendment: Declarations by a Co-Equal Branch on the Individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms. In 1924, Representatives considered handguns to be dangerous weapons because they can easily be concealed or discarded during law enforcement pursuits and they can be “replenished” by mail. Representatives thought that handguns like pistols were criminals’ “pet” firearms (and they still are today per the data), unlike others like shotguns and rifles.

Soon, in 1930, Representatives had another gun control debate in light of Prohibition-related crimes and fear of Communism, this time on pistols, revolvers, and machine guns, but at least one lawmaker noted that handguns were now considered self-defense weapons. Then, in 1934, Congress successfully passed the NFA. While Congress recognized that it can’t ban firearms under 2A, it can, under the interstate commerce clause, regulate them. Originally, it would have mandated handgun registration, but that was removed. What’s interesting is that failure to register didn’t implicate 2A rights until Congress passed the GCA per the Defendant. It then cites US v. Miller, in which SCOTUS analyzed 2A in the context of the history of militia service and held that SBS’s could not be said to be “part of the ordinary military equipment” that civil soldiers were expected to provide as part of their conscription into the militia because the Defendant (who was dead by then) failed to show how SBS’s would be useful in militia service. Miller, 307 U.S. at 178-82.

Then comes Heller, in which SCOTUS at that time interpreted Miller to hold that 2A protection “extends only to certain types of weapons”, i.e., “the Second Amendment does not protect those weapons not typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes, such as short-barreled shotguns.” The Defendant renders the latter dicta. The Heller Court even found that Miller didn’t thoroughly examine 2A, so it set up the proper framework for evaluating whether a particular weapon falls within 2A’s scope of protection by saying that “the [text of the] Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding.” “Bearable arms” include those “in common use at the time” a challenge is considered. The “common use” limitation, per the Heller Court, “is fairly supported by the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of ‘dangerous and unusual weapons.’” Id. at 627.

We now talk about Bruen. Here, Defendant claims that the NFA as applied to SBS possession implicates the plain text, and that the US can’t meet its burden on the registration requirement and the legal consequences of failing to register the firearm in question. However, the Defendant makes an error in the textual burden: he claims that a “bearable arm” per Heller and Hollis v. Lynch as one that “is in common use at the time,” “possessed at home,” and for “lawful purposes like self-defense.” The Defendant then cites the ATF’s data on the number of registered short-barreled firearms (not sure if that’s a good way to go, as that’s about shotguns, not rifles). The Defendant then claims that he is one of “the people” despite having some minor criminal history.

In regards to the historical analysis, his counsel found a pre-Bruen article that said that “long gun” registration requirements didn’t exist until the 1890s and were uncommon, and given that, there is no historical tradition of permanently depriving one of 2A rights for failing to register firearms. In fact, the NFA itself is a not a criminal statute, but a tax statute that carries felony criminal penalties (hmmm not sure about that), and hence wasn’t intended to permanently deprive violators of 2A rights.

The US opposes by saying that the NFA as applied to SBSs doesn’t implicate conduct protected by 2A, and claims Miller and Heller, which Bruen didn’t overturn, held that 2A doesn’t guarantee the right to keep and bear SBSs. It then claims that the NFA’s registration scheme for SBSs is no more burdensome than the shall-issue as noted in footnote 9 of Bruen, even if there’s no historical analogue. Regarding the historical burden, it cites to laws regarding arms trade, and a 1631 Virginia law that mandated recording of new arrivals and arms into the colony.  It then even cited the barrel proofing laws and other safety regulations like gunpowder inspections. This set of laws are mainly commercial regulations for quality control purposes, and unlike the NFA, they didn’t have criminal sanctions. The US says that those laws were mainly there to impose record-keeping and attendant payment requirements for documentation purposes, and to ensure traceability for crime investigations.

Defendant replies by saying that the US didn’t address whether SBS are protected by 2A, and that the historical analogues fail the historical test. When the US cited the NY 1652 statute regarding trade of guns, gunpowder, and lead, the Duke Center for Firearms Law pointed out that the exact text has been lost to history, so that isn’t really much of a help.

Regarding the VA 1631 registration statute, it was mainly a broad registration requirement for property (like a sales tax vs. 2A excise tax), and that it had no criminal penalty, let alone forfeiture of arms, so that is dissimilar to the NFA.

As for the 17th century Connecticut and Virginia laws regarding firearm and ammo sales to colonial residents only, that was enacted to prevent Indians from owning firearms, not to categorically regulate specific types of arms. Also, violations of those statutes didn’t result in permanent disarmament.

Unfortunately, District Judge Carlton Reeves, the same one who held that 18 USC § 922(g)(1) violated only Jessie Bullock’s 2A rights (which got reversed as of November 25, 2024), and even called out how baseless qualified immunity is in an order denying that this year, denied Shepherd’s motion to dismiss. Judge Reeves errs in his denial by pointing out that the Defendant hasn’t persuasively shown that SBS’s are “in common use today for self-defense”, which comes from the passage in Bruen below:

This statement was added because this is about whether the proper cause requirement for concealed carry permits violated the right to carry handguns for self-defense in that specific case. Judge Reeves then claims that SCOTUS has held that “dangerous and unusual” weapons are not protected by 2A, and even cites to other district court decisions upholding the NFA. Judge Reeves then says that Shepherd hasn’t explained why the NFA infringed on his rights, as it simply requires registration.

In summary, Judge Reeves erred for the following reasons:

1. He pointed out that Shepherd failed his burden on proving that SBS’s are “in common use for self-defense” when it was the US’s burden on proving that SBS’s are not “in common use” for lawful purposes like self-defense,
2. He failed to realize that the NFA registration requirement is a firearm regulation, specifically a regulation on "keep ... arms", which is being challenged on 2A grounds. Given that, the US must show that it is consistent with the historical tradition of firearm regulation.

Shepherd, who originally pled not guilty, changed his plea to guilty, but reserved his right to appeal the order denying the motion to dismiss. Judgment was entered on 12/4, and Shepherd appealed on 12/5.

I do not fully understand the law in Mississippi. I am moving from Ohio to Mississippi in a week. I do not currently have a CCW permit. I plan to get one when I am in Mississippi. My understanding of permitless carry is that I can conceal a weapon on day 1 when I move to Mississippi.

A little backstory that may be useful in answering my question is that I am an emancipated youth from the custody of the Mississippi Department of Child Protective Services. I am at the age of 20 years old as of July 2nd this year so not quite 21 yet. Is it legal for me to purchase a 9mm Handgun from an unlicensed individual through a private sale and for it to be signed into my name? What are the restrictions that apply to me as far as how I carry it? I know that I can be in possession of it within my home under the castle law, as well as my vehicle as it is an extension of the castle law. Am I allowed to open carry it? I know I cannot conceal it on my person until I turn 21 and have acquired the permit to do so.

I know a background check isn’t required for a transfer/sale but is a Mississippi state I’d required? What if they have an out of state license?

We have invested time into creating a pretty nice and active discord. Please join if you are interested! Let me know if you have any questions

https://discord.gg/8NWGDcu

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/20/virginia-gun-rights-rally-101183

This seems like a good place for people in Mississippi can talk about guns but doesn't seem very active. Anyone out there?

I'm looking for a local place that carries a good supply of various reloading supplies. Mostly powder and primers, but brass and projectiles would be nice also.

I'm just north of gulfport. I'm hoping to find somewhere as close as I can.

Saw this yesterday, figured I would post it here: http://gunowners.org/alertms03302016.htm

Just thought I would put the list on here for everyone to see what was good and what wasn't.

EDIT: Since the link doesnt work (silly me) here is a snip I have uploaded to imgur. If there is an E beside it, you are good. If and N then sales tax applies.

Link: http://imgur.com/HI6xqOi

I have asked around here and got the Memphis ranges and Como ranges. Just tossing this out there if anyone had more info on other outdoor ranges in my area.

MDWFP has opened a range in Mchenry, about 5 miles east of hwy. 49. It is open Thur-Sun. Features archery, skeet (.25/each), pistol, and rifle ranges. $42 per year for unlimited use or $5.50/hr. I have been using it and it is a nice facility with a friendly staff. If anyone is interested and wants more info let me know.

Since no one has posted much, I thought I would show one of my favorite guns. This is my Ruger Super Blackhawk 44 magnum I have had it for a few years now and love to shoot it when I can.

edit: fixed the link

I have set up the system where users can make their own flair. The idea is for you to put the Area where you live. This will make it easier to see who is from where and what is possible. Now I don't mind if you use the flair for something else. Just please don't be stupid with it.

Pretty self explanatory. If you have any ideas or suggestions let everyone know by posting it here. I am a complete newb when it comes to modding but will do my best to be fair to everyone here.