Examining the Pro-Gun Briefs in the SCOTUS AR-15 Case (Ft. Bearing Arms' Cam Edwards)

This week, we're taking a look at the briefs backing the plaintiffs in Viramontes v. Cook County.

Bearing Arms editor Cam Edwards joins the show to share what he thinks are the most important and the most interesting amicus briefs in the case. He noted that a ton of briefs were submitted, including briefs from all kinds of groups outside your typical gun groups. He said some briefs focus on how the Supreme Court could answer not just whether AR-15 bans are unconstitutional, but also whether magazine bans or other hardware bans are unconstitutional.

Cam pointed to one brief that seeks to clarify that AR-15s aren't more powerful than other similar rifles that "assault weapons" bans don't touch and aren't employed by the military. He said the argument sought to debunk the idea that AR-15s are unusually dangerous.

We also went in depth on the Department of Justice's brief in the case, which asks the court to adopt a very unique view of the "common use" test. Then, we talk about gun-rights lawyer Alan Beck's brief that unearths some interesting historical evidence to argue the "dangerous and unusual" standard traditionally applied to conduct rather than the weapons themselves.