https://www.wyomingnews.com/news/local_news/survey-public-opposes-firearms-in-capitol-new-rules-draft-allows-permitless-carry/article_5d6222fc-866d-11ef-b3cb-0bd19d96b84c.html

Did anyone see this survey? It appears to me it was 'targeted' at a known population for a predetermined result and then published to justify a decision that is actually CONTRARY to most Wyoming citizens.

As we all know, a Trump judge threw out the Hughes Amendment charge as applied to the Defendant (but not facially). The federal government has 30 days from August 21 (or 26) to file an appeal per Federal Rule 4(b)(1)(B) of the Appellate Procedure. While we wait until either of the two dates, a criminal appeal in another case regarding the Hughes Amendment got filed.

In this case, Steven Shobert got indicted on two counts: 18 USC § 922(o) (full auto possession), and 26 USC § 5861(d) (possession of short-barreled Aero Precision M4E1 not registered to him).

Background

Regarding Shobert, he is a veteran who has PTSD. Prior to the arms case, he got arrested twice for (alleged drunk driving), per a Powell Tribune article. In the first arrest on Thursday, July 27, 2023, Shobert drove to the home of an off-duty Officer Andrew Cady, and had a loaded pistol in his waistband. Per Cady’s affidavit, at Cady’s home, Shobert reportedly wanted to talk about the ongoing investigation into the disappearance of Washakie County resident Breanna Mitchell; Shobert said he’d thought about “taking matters in his own hands” and shooting a man that he thought might be responsible for Mitchell’s disappearance. Shobert reportedly said that “You can probably tell I’ve had a couple drinks” at another point, allegedly adding that he was also taking the prescription painkiller Dilaudid and probably shouldn’t be driving. Shobert then allegedly drew his revolver and pointed it toward the officer’s house, where there were children inside. Cady then summoned help, and seven officers from the sheriff’s office and the Worland Police Department eventually responded and arrested Shobert. His BAC 5 hours after that incident was pegged at 0.15%.

After the first arrest, he was released from detainment to get medical treatment for alcohol withdrawal on July 28, 2023, and was supposed to return to jail once the condition got stabilized. However, on Sunday, July 30, 2023, he got intoxicated in Cody and crashed into the power pole while driving under the influence, which knocked the power out for many Cody residents. The police found Cody impaired and took him to custody.

By the way, in another affidavit Shobert has a significant history of contacts with law enforcement involving alcohol and firearms. For example, there was an incident in early 2021 in which Shobert was suicidal and predicted a “shoot-out” with police. The affidavit added that Shobert “continually exhibits poor decision making by mixing the use of alcohol and firearms.” At county level, he’s facing misdemeanor counts of “DUI” and unlawful concealed carry.

In regards to the federal case, on July 28, 2023 (the day Shobert got released to get medical help for his alcohol withdrawal), city and county police executed an allegedly consensual search and seized all guns, parts, and ammo. Among them included three AR-15 full auto conversion devices, and one switched 9mm Glock.

Judicial Proceedings

He filed two separate motions to dismiss: one against the Hughes Amendment, and another against the SBR law. The Hughes MTD said that DC v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) hasn’t resolved anything further from DC’s handgun ban and storage requirement, so NYSRPA v. Bruen clarified the standard. At the textual level, Defendant claims that even though “Second Amendment’s definition of ‘arms’ is fixed according to its historical understanding, that general definition covers modern instruments that facilitate armed self-defense”, which includes full autos. Therefore, keeping and bearing a machine gun is presumptively protected under 2A’s plain text.

The Defendant acknowledged the existence of a pre-Heller case United States v. Haney, 264 F.3d 1161 (10th Cir. 2001), which held that 2A conferred no individual right and that firearm regulations are subject to means-end scrutiny. Therefore, the Defendant claims that this is no longer good law.

As for the second step, Defendant points to Bruen by pointing to historical laws prohibiting the carrying of “dangerous and unusual” arms in a manner likely to terrorize the public. As for the “common use” standard, Defendant claims that there are at least 740,000 lawfully possessed full autos in the US (in reality, it’s 176,000 for privately owned and transferrable full autos). Whatever the number, it’s more than the 64,890 nunchakus that have been sold in the retail market per Maloney v. Singas, 351 F. Supp. 3d 222 (E.D.N.Y. 2018). Defendant also claims that unlawfully owned full autos count for the purposes of determining whether they are in common use and cites to the circularity claim of common use in Friedman v. Highland Park, 784 F.3d 406 (7th Cir. 2015). As applied to him, there is no evidence that Shobert terrorized or harmed others with his machine guns, and claims that his mere possession of full autos is his exercise of his constitutional right.

In the SBR MTD, he says that the NFA was first enacted in 1934. He also acknowledges the pre-Bruen decision US v. Cox, 906 F.3d 1170 (10th Cir. 2018), which held that SBRs fell outside of the “arms” protected by 2A because of their similarity to SBS’s, and cited to US v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1937), in support. He says that Cox is not good law anymore because firstly, Bruen makes clear that deeper historical inquiries than rote comparison between two different weapons is required when assessing the scope of the Second Amendment, and secondly, it relied on dicta from Heller which relied on Miller. However, Heller said that “[i]t is particularly wrongheaded to read Miller for more than what it said, because the case did not even purport to be a thorough examination of the Second Amendment.” Moreover, Cox had a very minimal record on why SBRs are different from SBSs. Shobert cited Half-Cocked to support his claim that short-barreled firearms existed at the time of drafting and ratification of 2A, while the regulation of those is rather new. Finally, Shobert says that there are 532,725 SBRs as of May 2021, and he concludes that the NFA as applied to SBRs are unconstitutional because the NFA doesn’t have any historical pedigree.

The US filed an opposition to the full auto MTD and that to the SBR MTD. In the Full Auto Opposition, the US said that SCOTUS precedent holds that § 922(o) doesn’t implicate 2A’s plain text by saying the following:

The Heller Court considered the potential objection to its reasoning “that if weapons that are most useful in military service—M-16 rifles and the like—may be banned, then the Second Amendment right is completely detached from the prefatory clause” concerning the necessity of a well-regulated militia. Id. But the Court rebuffed this objection, explaining that “the conception of the militia at the time of the Second Amendment’s ratification was the body of all citizens capable of military service, who would bring the sorts of lawful weapons that they possessed at home to militia duty.” Id. Thus, the Court found it implicit and obvious that under its reading of the Second Amendment, “M-16 rifles and the like . . . may be banned[.]” Id.

US also says that Bruen didn’t change the precedent and says that 740,000 machine guns compared to 334,914,895 Americans can’t be commonly possessed and clarifies that 740,000 machine guns include those owned by the government, so machine guns can’t be “in common use”.

As for the historical tradition, it pointed to the authorities that Heller cited regarding “dangerous and unusual weapons” (which were about carrying, not possessing), and said that

[t]he Court, anticipating arguments that modern military weapons were required, rejected those arguments. Id. (“But the fact that modern developments have limited the degree of fit between the prefatory clause and the protected right cannot change our interpretation of right.”)

In the opposition to the SBR MTD, when the US claimed that the NFA as applied to SBRs doesn’t implicate 2A’s plain text, it said that

Heller rejected a reading of Miller that the Second Amendment protected weapons “useful in warfare,” noting that this reading would lead to the “startling” result that “the National Firearms Act’s restrictions on machineguns (not challenged in Miller) might be unconstitutional, machineguns being useful in warfare in 1939.”

In reality, Heller rejected the claim that 2A protected only those weapons “useful in warfare.”

The US also claims that the 532,725 SBRs vs. 334,914,895 Americans can’t be commonly possessed and clarifies that 532,725 SBRs include those owned by the government, so SBRs can’t be “in common use”. It also repeats the same reason for the historical inquiry.

Unfortunately, Shobert never filed a reply in support of both MTDs, and in a minute order, District Judge Scott Skavdahl (the same one who ruled against Jake DeWilde) orally denied the MTDs in addition to the motion to suppress.

Shobert, who originally pled not guilty to both counts, changed his plea to guilty as to the full auto possession, and at judgment, the NFA charge got dismissed on US’s motion. Judge Skavdahl at the sentencing hearing wished him the best of luck in getting rehabilitated and maintaining sobriety while serving the latter’s sentence per this article.

The truth is that in Heller, Scalia put in the “M-16’s and the like” to acknowledge the stigma that full autos may be banned, which decouples the prefatory clause from the operative clause, which one may object. In the sentence after that, it stated that the militiamen would bring lawful weapons that were commonly possessed at home for militia duty, which were “ordinary military equipment.” The flaw in concluding that full autos may be banned from these two statements is that the reason for the full auto ban is circular. Finally, regarding the statement “But the fact that modern developments have limited the degree of fit between the prefatory clause and the protected right cannot change our interpretation of the right.”, while there are modern weapons (and vehicles) that civilians can’t possess as of right now or are not really suitable for militia musters, the interpretation of 2A is “dead”, as “Constitutional rights are enshrined with the scope they were understood to have when the people adopted them” in 1791, and “not all history is created equal” when it interpreting the Constitution given the changing public and judicial opinions regarding 2A since 1791. For example, in the 19th century, courts have leaned mainly on the militia side of 2A (individual rights, mainly, but some have said that 2A protects a collective right to a militia instead of an individual right), but nowadays, courts have been leaning more on private self-defense when 2A actually protects all lawful purposes, which includes the militia side of 2A.

I’m new here to Casper, but I’m headed back overseas this year and I’m looking to thin out my guns for some photography equipment I’ll need overseas. Where’s the best place to advertise or sell locally? I have an AR10, Glock 17 race gun, ar9 stripped lower, maybe two ar stripped lowers.

Reply brief here.

Long story short, DeWilde points out the government’s weak logic in upholding the Hughes Amendment. DeWilde points out the Heller’s mere desire to own a handgun in DC satisfies standing, and the individual Bruen plaintiffs’ desire to carry handguns outside for self-defense satisfies standing, so his own desire to acquire a full auto (which, in reality, he has one) also satisfies. DeWilde points out that the government uses Heller’s dicta in upholding the Hughes Amendment, but Heller said that “[i]t is inconceivable that [the Supreme Court] would rest [its] interpretation of the basic meaning of any guarantee of the Bill of Rights upon… dict[a] in a case where the point was not at issue and was not argued.” DeWilde says that “common use” should be a sufficient condition for any arm, not a necessary condition for arms owned by the civilians. In fact, he cites US v. Miller’s comment regarding able-bodied men bringing weapons “in common use at the time” for militia service. Here, DeWilde says that arms used for militia service were also used by the military. He also says that the “common use” test is based on the “historical tradition of carrying ‘dangerous and unusual’ weapons” (here, the Hughes Amendment proscribes the private possession of posties), and elucidates the meaning of D&U, which refers to affrays, not a class of arms. DeWilde also points out that the governments’ other analogues fail to suffice the justification of the Hughes Amendment, and he even points out that when the NFA was debated, the full auto ban would raise constitutional questions, so the tax was implemented so as to be “easily within the law” (in reality, infringe means to hinder or destroy, and the mere tax and other NFA requirements by definition hinder on one’s ability to exercise 2A rights, despite being previously upheld in Sonzinsky under the Taxing Power). DeWilde also cites The Federalist No. 46 in support of striking down the Hughes Amendment.

DeWilde, however, makes one error: while he points out that the government has been conflating the historical (second) and textual (first) prongs in the Bruen analysis, he cites a passage regarding Thomas’s comment on how the courts would use the second step for the means-end scrutiny test.

WY is one of the states where I’m looking at properties. Either WY, NH, MT, or ME. Need a cold area with good gun laws, bonus if it has no income tax.

Say I buy an acre of land with a house on it. No houses or buildings within a mile or two. Would I be able to target practice on my own property? I currently live in the Mid East coast and being able to plink in my back yard is a wild concept to me.

If I’m able to shoot on my property with the above conditions, how close would my neighbors have to be before it becomes a legal issue? Or does it depend on local ordinances?

We have a handful of openings on most of our courses running next month. Let us know if you have any questions. All courses are $100 (except the Utah Standalone course) and all courses are taught at our private range in Dacono Colorado.

August:

7th - Basic Pistol I | 10:00 am - 2:00 pm**

8th - Defensive Pistol I | 10:00 am - 2:00 pm**

14th - Basic Rifle AR15 | 10:00 am - 2:00 pm**

15th - Tactical Rifle | 10:00 am - 2:00 pm**

21st - Defensive Pistol II | 10:00 am - 2:00 pm**

22nd - Defensive Pistol I | 10:00 am - 2:00 pm**

22nd - Utah CFP Course | 3:00pm - 5:00pm ($50)

More details here, register here

Good Afternoon, I am the owner and lead instructor at Colorado Firearm Academy. We are located a little over an hour south of Cheyenne on the I-25 corridor and a little over 1.5 hours from Laramie. Over the last few years, we have had numerous students make the trek from Cheyenne or Laramie to train with us.

We offer 4 levels of Pistol Courses, 3 rifle courses, 2 shotgun courses, an RSO course, Tactical First Aid, and a Utah Non-resident Permit course. All of our courses are $100 (unless specified otherwise) and are taught on a spacious private range. Most courses are capped at 6 students so you will receive dedicated time with an instructor.

We have also created a discount code for you guys to save 15% off any of our scheduled courses with code "wyguns".

You can view details about our courses here, upcoming course schedule here, and if you have any questions please ask them in the comments or email us at info@ColoradoFirearmAcademy.com

I will be visiting your great state this summer. I am from IL (yeah, I know) and my conceal carry permit is not honored in Wyoming. I read that open carry is okay for non-residents. Will I get any weird looks roaming around Sheridan area while open carrying? Do some towns or businesses (bars) not allow open carry? Its just a small Sig 365 not some 454 casull revolver.

Probably a pipe dream, but next time I can find stripped lowers in stock I'm going to buy like 10.

Is there an FFL around that will charge me a flat rate for this and not per gun?

Thanks

I checked out their website, but it looks like it hasn't been updated in a hot minute. Mostly just wanting to know about how much a membership costs.

I was thinking of heading up to Cheyenne from Denver and go shooting with some friends. I looked online and they mentioned something about a place by the Otis gun club but I am unsure if that place is open still or if there is another place close to Cheyenne to shoot?

Also I was maybe looking for some parts that I can't find in Colorado for my Marlin 795. Where would there be a good place to find one?

I am planning on bringing a tarp to catch brass and a few trash bags for trash.

Is it legal to shoot on public land like it is in Utah?

I recently purchased an SAR-1 AK-47, and while I have been able to fire it a little, I don't really know where to go in order to have a good, long firing session. The indoor range at the fairgrounds only takes .22 caliber rifles, so I'm out of luck with the 7.62 rounds. Does anyone know of some good public land that's not terribly far out of Laramie for shooting?

What's your approx location and willingness for a Wyogunnit range day?

Casper area here, where you guys at?

Please contact your local (or all) Senators and let them know you are in favor of HB 114 which eliminates gun free zones and allows CCW holders to carry on campuses in Wyoming!

Do not let this bill die for the 3rd time in the Senate!

List of Wyoming Senators