lawselfdefense

YUGE Win for 2A: ATF Free Suppressors! WATCH HERE--> youtu.be/V5M2nNAd3CA Two weeks ago a federal judge in Texas ruled that the NFA's registration and application requirements for suppressors and some other normally tightly-controlled gun-related items — because Congress zeroed out the transfer and taxes that used to justify them under the taxing power. No tax, no revenue, no constitutional basis. That's a massive win for gun owners tired of fingerprints, photos, and months-long waits just to make or transfer these firearms. Yesterday the deadline for the Trump administration to file for a stay of that order expired, and today some very brave Second Amendment champions began transferring suppressors free of the ATF registration requirements for the first time in 94 YEARS! But don't pop the champagne for everyone just yet. This is a district court decision, not a nationwide rule — the injunction only protects the named plaintiffs, their members, and their customers, machineguns and destructive devices aren't touched, and the order is stayed seven days for an expected appeal. Also, although yesterday was the deadline for the government to ask for a stay of this trial court decision, the government still has 6 weeks in which to seek an appeal to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, which could reverse. WATCH HERE---> youtu.be/V5M2nNAd3CA

Harmeet Dhillon to SCOTUS: Hands Off Our AR Rifles! The great and powerful Harmeet Dhillon, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice, has just filed a brief with the US Supreme Court in defense of American’s Second Amendment right to keep and bear AR-style rifles—the so-called “assault weapons” that a handful of states and every Progressive politicians wants to wrest from our grasp. The case is question is Viramontes v. Cook County, involves an Illinois “assault weapons” ban, and is a Second Amendment challenge to various state and local “assault weapons” bans. This case has been advanced by the Second Amendment Foundation and my friend Attorney Kostas Moros, once again doing stellar work in defense of American’s civil rights. SCOTUS has combined this case with another AWB case, Grant v. Higgins, which involves a similar “assault weapons” ban out of Connecticut, and the legal question on such bans will likely be settled for the entire country in the Court’s ultimate ruling. Specifically, the legal question presented before SCOTUS is whether the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect an individual’s right to possess AR-15-platform and similar semiautomatic rifles. The case tests how Heller and Bruen apply to commonly owned semiautomatic rifles that governments have labeled “assault weapons.” Oral argument is scheduled for December 2 of this year, and the past week has seen dozens of excellent Amici briefs submitted in support of the Second Amendment and in opposition to the bans. Prominent among these amicus briefs is that submitted this week by AAG Harmeet Dhillon, and that’s the one I’ve selected to highlight today. youtu.be/tMUFb5Crxj8

SCOTUS: States' Rights vs. Immigration Chaos! LIVE at 9 AM ET! youtube.com/live/3BlAMmhuYko For complete Medicare guidance, dial (617) 644-0093 to speak with my trusted partner, Chapter Medicare Advisors. Can a state actually help enforce federal immigration law—or does the Constitution force states to sit on their hands while illegal immigration overruns their communities? That's the question at the heart of a major cert petition now before the Supreme Court, and Senators Ted Cruz and Chuck Grassley just filed a blistering amicus brief taking direct aim at the Eighth Circuit's decision to strike down Iowa's immigration law. Today we break it all down, plain-English style. The brief argues the real culprit is the Supreme Court's own 2012 decision in Arizona v. United States—a ruling so poorly reasoned it turned "conflict preemption" into a one-way ratchet: states that try to help Washington enforce the law get shut down, while sanctuary states that openly obstruct federal enforcement get a pass. Cruz and Grassley say it's time for the Court to fix its own mess before more states lose the ability to defend their citizens from an immigration crisis the Founders never envisioned tolerating. Join me LIVE at 9 AM ET as I break it all down! youtube.com/live/3BlAMmhuYko

Legal Perils of Pursuit: Murder Trial of Rick Chow! lawofselfdefense.com/members… LET’S BREAK DOWN THE OPENING STATEMENTS OF THIS MURDER/DEFENSE OF OTHERS TRIAL CURRENTLY TAKING PLACE IN SOUTH CAROLINA! On May 28, 2023, 14-year-old Cyrus Carmack-Belton entered Rick Chow’s Shell gas station convenience store on Parklane Road in Columbia, South Carolina. Surveillance video showed him picking up four bottles of water and putting them back; prosecutors say he did not steal anything. Chow, his son Andy, and wife confronted the teen, who then left the store. Chow and his son chased him approximately 130 yards off the property. At that point a 9mm pistol emerged from the pocket of Carmack-Belton’s hoodie, either being presented as a weapon or falling to the ground in the course of the flight. Chow, armed with a .45-caliber Glock, fired one shot that struck Carmack-Belton in the lower back, passing through his lung and heart, killing him. A loaded 9mm pistol with a laser sight was later found near the teen. Prosecutors allege an unjustified chase and shooting of a fleeing boy; the defense claims the teen pointed the gun at Andy Chow, and Rick Chow fired in defense of his son. Chow is on trial for murder and has pleaded not guilty on the grounds of justified defense of others.

Was Ritchson Justified? A Self-Defense Attorney Weighs In youtu.be/auPbg7GYvp4 Alan Ritchson plays a man who always knows exactly how much force is necessary. But in a real fight with a real neighbor, the rules are different -- and the consequences are too. A self-defense attorney with 35 years in use-of-force law breaks down what Ritchson was legally allowed to do, what he wasn't, and why the answer probably isn't what you think. This is use-of-force law applied to a real-world incident -- no tabloid spin, no guesswork. BE HARD TO CONVICT if you're ever compelled to defend yourself, your family, or your property (including pets)! GET YOUR FREE BOOK: "The Law of Self Defense: Principles” lawofselfdefense.com/freeboo… youtu.be/auPbg7GYvp4

Man Who Shot Fleeing Burglars to be Tried for MANSLAUGHTER! youtu.be/Tm6OHvFz6F0 Detroit-area resident Dayton Knapton, who shot at a group of fleeing burglars on July 8, 2025, killing 17-year-old burglar Sivan Wilson, has been bound over for trial on a charge of manslaughter for the killing, multiple counts of assault with intent to do great bodily harm, and two counts of a firearm enhancement. Knapton claims self-defense, and told responding officers that the burglars came at him. Unfortunately, his own home surveillance footage casts doubt on this narrative of self-defense. Even worse, Knapton’s self-defense statements to police, while intended to be exculpatory, are actually likely to be used by the prosecution to incriminate him further than the damaging video alone. BE HARD TO CONVICT if you're ever compelled to defend yourself, your family, or your property (including pets)! GET YOUR FREE BOOK: "The Law of Self Defense: Principles” lawofselfdefense.com/freeboo… youtu.be/Tm6OHvFz6F0

NOW OFFICIAL LAW! TN to Allow DEADLY FORCE in Defense of PROPERTY! youtu.be/-Gprbot1L88 For decades there has been only one state in America that allowed for the use of deadly force in defense of mere personal property—the great state of Texas. In every other state you are limited to only non-deadly force in defense of property, period—and often not even that much. There’s been nothing to prevent other states from adopting as similar deadly force in defense of personal property law as Texas—it’s just that none ever has. Now that may be changing. The Tennessee legislature is considering a statute that would allow for the use of deadly force in defense of personal property under certain circumstances. Known as SB 1847 in the TN senate or HB 1802 in the Tennessee house, the proposed statute borrows quite a bit from the long-standing Texas law, but also differs in important respects. BE HARD TO CONVICT if you're ever compelled to defend yourself, your family, or your property (including pets)! GET YOUR FREE BOOK: "The Law of Self Defense: Principles” lawofselfdefense.com/freeboo… youtu.be/-Gprbot1L88

How Chud WINS on Self-Defense In Nashville Shooting! youtu.be/ucjdoca3r4Y Dalton Eatherly, known online as "Chud the Builder," recently shot a man named Joshua Fox in Tennessee. Chud has built a reputation for deliberately provoking confrontations in public spaces—calling Black individuals racial slurs, making inflammatory remarks designed to agitate, and seemingly looking for conflict, all for the purpose of creating social media content. That pattern makes context critical as we analyze the shooting confrontation with Joshua Fox. This is a case where legal analysis requires walking a difficult line. Whatever one thinks of Chud’s antics, he has all the same rights of self-defense against unlawful attack as the rest of us—no more, and no less. The outcome in this shooting depends entirely on facts: Did Chud reasonably believe he faced imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm? Did he provoke the confrontation and acquire a legal duty to retreat in what is normally a stand-your-ground state? Provocation complicates a self-defense claim but doesn't automatically eliminate it. We'll break down the known and speculative facts, the applicable law, and explore the various legal outcomes. The purpose of all this? So you have a better understanding of the legal boundaries for the lawful use of force. BE HARD TO CONVICT if you're ever compelled to defend yourself, your family, or your property (including pets)! GET YOUR FREE BOOK: "The Law of Self Defense: Principles” lawofselfdefense.com/freeboo… youtu.be/ucjdoca3r4Y

How Chud’s LEGAL DEFENSE Looks Stronger Every Day! youtu.be/Vmk1pVT25oY Despite overwhelmingly negative media coverage, the legal arguments in defense of Dalton “Chud the Builder” Eatherly looks stronger with every passing day. Eatherly has been charged with attempted murder for shooting Joshua Foxx in the stomach and shoulder outside the Montgomery County courthouse last week, after Foxx chased Chud down and attacked him. Eatherly is white, and best known for producing provocative social media content in which he refers to black people as the n-word to their face in public. Foxx is black and has an extensive criminal history of violence. Eatherly is currently being held on a bond of $1.25 million, a level that seems grotesquely out of proportion given many other lesser bonds issues by the same court for much more serious criminal offenses. In contrast, Joshua Foxx has yet to be charged with any crime for his attack on Eatherly—a disparity that is not escaping supporters of Eatherly in particular and the public in general. The last few days have also seen observers of Eatherly’s legal travails falling into one of four camps, from straightforward legal analysis on one of the spectrum, to outright socio-political commentary on the other. Both these extremes have their merits, but ongoing conflation of them continues to cause confusion and misunderstanding. BE HARD TO CONVICT if you're ever compelled to defend yourself, your family, or your property (including pets)! GET YOUR FREE BOOK: "The Law of Self Defense: Principles” lawofselfdefense.com/freeboo… youtu.be/Vmk1pVT25oY

CHUD! Claim of Self-Defense Just Gets STRONGER! youtu.be/9ajCF9EY6XU Chud the Builder’s claim of self-defense keeps getting stronger, and the prosecution’s case for guilt keeps getting weaker. EVERY. SINGLE. DAY. In yesterday’s court appearance new evidence was revealed that only strengthens the self-defense claim of Dalton “Chud the Builder” Eatherly’s in his shooting of Joshua Fox, while increasingly making clear that it was Fox who was the unlawful deadly-force aggressor in violently attacking Eatherly. Indeed, now a full nine days after the May 13 attack by Joshua Fox, a black man, on Eatherly, a white man, every one of the most-feared vulnerabilities in Eatherly’s claim of self-defense are resolving in Eatherly’s favor, and the evidence of Fox as an enraged deadly force aggressor of an innocent, retreating Eatherly only grows greater. BE HARD TO CONVICT if you're ever compelled to defend yourself, your family, or your property (including pets)! GET YOUR FREE BOOK: "The Law of Self Defense: Principles” lawofselfdefense.com/freeboo… youtu.be/9ajCF9EY6XU

How Police Complaint Against Chud is WEAK SAUCE! youtu.be/ZeBTBbIwxgQ Today we’ll take a look at the just released official Affidavit of Complaint against Dalton "Chud the Builder" Eatherly in his attempted murder case. The document has just been made public, and as I review it I see significant gaps in the State's prosecution strategy. These gaps could well mark a turning point in the case against Dalton. The affidavit fails to present an evidence-based criminal narrative. Notably absent is any mention of inflammatory language. The document describes a verbal altercation, defensive stance, and physical contact—but critically lacks any claim that Eatherly initiated the confrontation. These omissions matter significantly when the State bears the burden of proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt while disproving self-defense. I’ll break down each element of the affidavit and examine what it does—and doesn't—establish, so we all have an essential legal understanding on where the case stands and what comes next. BE HARD TO CONVICT if you're ever compelled to defend yourself, your family, or your property (including pets)! GET YOUR FREE BOOK: "The Law of Self Defense: Principles” lawofselfdefense.com/freeboo… youtu.be/ZeBTBbIwxgQ

LawTuber @LegalBytes’ Thoughts on Chud: Let’s Watch! youtu.be/rfWsZr6ThdQ LawTuber & Attorney @LegalBytes this morning released a YouTube video with her legal thoughts on the case of Dalton “Chud the Builder” Easterly. I covered just a few seconds of it in my morning show, because I found her take on that portion rather at odd with the actual law of self-defense governing this case—and, sure enough her take didn’t make any legal sense to me whatever. That said, I’ve yet to watch her ENTIRE breakdown of the case, which she covers over about 20 minutes, and in this morning’s poll 97% voted to have me cover the entire video, so join me to do exactly that right HERE! BE HARD TO CONVICT if you're ever compelled to defend yourself, your family, or your property (including pets)! GET YOUR FREE BOOK: "The Law of Self Defense: Principles” lawofselfdefense.com/freeboo… youtu.be/rfWsZr6ThdQ