David Hardy

David Hardy Blogs

Blog Authors

Latest from David Hardy

Koons v. Platkin, District of NJ. It’s 230 pages long, and I’ve only skimmed it, but it appears to uphold the permitting system and to strike down the “sensitive places” expansions, the “default rule” (no carrying on private property unless the owner posts his permission), and the insurance mandate. Congrats to the Second Amendment Foundation, to David Jensen, and to Dan Schmutter!
Continue Reading Ruling on NJ's response to Bruen

I’ve been receiving emails from a LendingTree address, directing me to this page, giving results of a survey. Two things of note:

“Insurance companies could hold a solution to gun control. 75% of Americans believe gun owners should be required to have liability insurance on their firearms. The majority (44%) think firearm owners should be required to have separate insurance policies for each weapon, while 31% say a single policy per owner would be enough.”


“When it comes to gun ownership and insurance, many homeowners may not know they already have some form of coverage. The majority (56%)
Continue Reading Lending Tree?

At American Greatness:

“Defunding the police is based on the implicit assumption that greater criminality and violence, mostly directed against the most vulnerable, is a small price to pay, given a) the stigmatized criminal is given exemption, and b) the architects of defunding have mechanisms to ensure they are [not] exposed to inevitable spiraling crime rates.

Ditto gun control. The socialist point of neutering the Second Amendment is not just to disarm the populace, much less to prevent shootings. Rather, the aim is to ensure the government has a complete monopoly on arms, so that it can calibrate both
Continue Reading Victor Davis Hanson on gun control

In Hardin v. ATF. A few noteworthy things:

“This raises the question of whether a bump stock is a machinegun “part” as defined by the National Firearms Act of 1934. The question is a close one on which reasonable jurists have disagreed, a disagreement caused by ambiguities in how the applicable statute defines the term “machinegun.”
An Act of Congress could clear up the ambiguities, but so far Congress has failed to act. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (the ATF) has been on both sides of this issue, with its current regulation (the Rule) banning bump
Continue Reading 6th Circuit rules bumpstocks are not NFA weapons