Commonwealth Second Amendment (Comm2A)

11/08/2026

To strip away the emotional rhetoric often found in policy debates, it helps to look purely at history and engineering.

The mechanism behind the AR-15 is often described in modern political debates as space-age or unprecedentedly dangerous military technology that somehow bled into the civilian market. In reality, the historical timeline shows the exact opposite: semi-automatic r***e technology was born, refined, and widely owned in the civilian market long before the military ever adopted it as a standard-issue infantry weapon.

The very first commercially successful semi-automatic r***es, such as the Wi******er Model 1903 and the Re*****on Model 8, were introduced in the early 1900s specifically for civilian hunters and sport shooters.

American citizens were purchasing self-loading centerfire r***es with detachable magazines out of mail-order catalogs and owning them by the hundreds of thousands while United States soldiers were still being issued old-fashioned, bolt-action r***es.

The U.S. military did not officially replace its standard bolt-action infantry r***e with a semi-automatic one until the adoption of the M1 Garand in 1936—more than three decades after civilians had already adopted the technology.

By the time the federal government authorized the Federal Interstate Highway System in 1956, multi-shot, self-loading r***es had already been a staple of American civilian life for over half a century. When Eugene Stoner designed the AR-15 platform in the late 1950s, he was not inventing a new class of weapon or adapting a military marvel for common use; he was merely refining standard, decades-old civilian mechanical engineering.

This historical timeline forms a core part of the engineering argument in the Comm2A Supreme Court amicus brief for Viramontes v. Cook County. The brief explains that an AR-15 operates on the exact same "determinate and discriminate" single-trigger-cycle physics as those early 20th-century civilian fi****ms. Pulling the trigger fires exactly one round, unloads the spent casing, and loads the next round. Cosmetic additions like plastic grips or adjustable stocks do not change this basic mechanical reality—they are simply ergonomic adjustments to fit different body sizes safely.

Treating a legacy civilian operating system as a novel, hyper-modern military threat is historically backwards and legally flawed. Banning a r***e based on its visual design ignores a century of civilian technological history and infringes on arms that have always been in common use for lawful purposes.

Defending constitutional rights against overreaching bans requires rigorous legal and technical work. To support this defense and help fund vital filings like the Viramontes amicus brief, please consider making a tax-deductible donation to Comm2A today.

https://comm2a.org/donate

Visit the Comm2A website to read the full amicus brief and contribute to the legal defense of the Second Amendment.

****ms

11/02/2026

When anti-gun politicians talk to the public, they brand the AR-15 as an inherently dangerous "weapon of war" that has no place on civilian streets.

But behind closed doors? Their own official police academy training manuals teach the exact opposite!

In our Supreme Court amicus brief for Viramontes v. Cook County, Comm2A exposed the hypocrisy using the government's own training curricula, The Massachusetts Municipal Police Training Manual, the same or similar instructions are used in police academies across the nation:

The Myth: Semi-automatic r***es are uniquely dangerous, imprecise, and too destructive for domestic defense.
The Police Manual Reality: Official municipal academy textbooks explicitly teach officers that the AR platform is actually the safest and most effective option available because of three critical facts:

Improved Accuracy: A shoulder-fired, stabilized platform dramatically increases precision under stress compared to a handgun, meaning fewer stray shots and a drastically reduced risk to innocent bystanders.

Reduced Overpenetration Risk: Modern defensive r***e rounds are specifically highlighted in training for their tendency to fragment upon hitting walls or barriers, presenting less risk of passing through structures and hitting neighbors than traditional handgun or sh***un rounds.

Superior Ergonomics: Features like adjustable stocks and pistol grips aren't "military attachments"—manuals teach that they are basic ergonomic necessities that allow users of all physical sizes to properly fit, control, and safely retain the fi***rm.

The state’s own tactical experts admit that these features make the r***e the optimal tool for defense. Yet, they want to ban you from owning one.

Your right to the safest, most accurate tool to protect your family should never depend on a government paycheck or wearing a uniform. Law-abiding citizens face the same threats as off-duty officers and deserve the same right to the best tool to survive them.

We are taking this fight all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court to dismantle these unconstitutional bans.
Stand with us. Support the fight. Help Comm2A protect your right to self-defense: https://comm2a.org/donate

10/31/2026

When gun control advocates talk about banning "assault weapons," they claim they are only targeting tactical cosmetic features like pistol grips and folding stocks. But what happens when a state completely drops the mask and shows what the real plan is? Massachusetts would seek to ban fi****ms like the FightLite SCR series of r***es because they hold many components in common with the AR-15 platform.

In our recent Supreme Court amicus brief for Viramontes v. Cook County, Comm2A is exposing how Massachusetts quietly expanded its ban to outlaw traditional-looking r***es simply because of the internal tech they use.

If the Supreme Court upholds these feature bans, it gives states a blank check to freeze legal fi***rm innovation in the mid-20th century. A Second Amendment exception for "assault weapons" will quickly become the exception that swallows the entire rule.

We are small, but we are punching straight to the top.

Read our full Supreme Court brief here:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/25/25-238/423206/20260904214714216_Comm2a_Amicus%20Document%20September%204%202026%20EFile.pdf

09/26/2026

As the Supreme Court prepares for oral arguments in Viramontes v. Cook County on December 2, 2026, a newly filed amicus brief by the Commonwealth Second Amendment (Comm2A) breaks away from standard legal talking points to address these all too common fi****ms bans using physics and engineering.

Prepared by Attorney David Jensen with input from some technically minded folks here at Comm2A, the brief bypasses abstract theory to introduce an airtight mechanical standard: the “determinate and discriminate” function filter, which uses physics to separate constitutionally protected fi****ms from indiscriminate ordnance based strictly on the single-trigger-cycle mechanism.

Most notably, the brief lays bare the hypocrisy in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Municipal Police training manual to expose a glaring double standard (training materials which are echoed across the nation). While lawyers arguing against our position will claim that semi-automatic r***es are too destructive for civilian self-defense, many of their own law enforcement academies openly instruct trainees that the AR platform is the safest, most precise, and best tool for almost every defensive situation. Because police officers are legally just civilian employees of a municipality or state, the brief highlights the absurdity of validating a defensive tool for one group of civilian employees while criminalizing it for the general public.

Finally, the brief dismantles the highly politicized “assault weapons features” debate by reducing components like adjustable stocks and pistol grips to basic human-factors engineering. Rather than increasing lethality, these features are framed as standard ergonomic adjustments necessary to safely fit shooters of varying physical sizes and statures. By pinning the case to objective mechanics and empirical state contradictions, this filing creates a logical catch-22 that gun-regulation lawyers will find incredibly difficult to counter without arguing against their own training curricula.

Please feel free to reach out if you have any questions.

As the Supreme Court prepares for oral arguments in Viramontes v. Cook County on December 2, 2026, a newly filed amicus brief by the Commonwealth Second Amendment (Comm2A) breaks away from standard legal talking points to address these all too common fi****ms bans using physics and engineering. Prep...

09/05/2026

We at Comm2A have been keeping our noses to the grindstone working to get this Amicus brief before The Supreme Court of The United States in the Viramontes matter now set for argument on December 2nd.

We want to thank Attorney David Jensen for his tireless efforts on our behalf, and on behalf of lawful fi****ms owners everywhere.

This brief is structured not as an "Hey SCOTUS, us too!", rather as a method to better address some of the ways folks who seek to maintain gun bans define modern r***e platforms as "Dangerous and Unusual" by pointing out that the underlying design of the AR platform, the direct gas impingement system has existed for just over 70 years, and while Massachusetts would seek to ban anything that uses a similar system, the Constitution cannot support such a ban.

The hypocrisy is laid bare for SCOTUS as we reference the training material for municipal police officers the Commonwealth uses at the academy. While the Commonwealth tells us that AR platform r***es are too dangerous to use in a self defense scenario, they actually teach police officers that the "patrol r***e" is the "superior tool" for defensive engagement.

It simply cannot be both.

The folks at Comm2A are not lawyers, we are not lobbyists. We are a handful of engineers, working hard to keep our rights protected.

09/05/2026

We at Comm2A have been keeping our noses to the grindstone working on an Amicus Brief in the Viramontes case currently before The Supreme Court of the United States.

Many thanks to Attorney David Jensen for his tireless efforts on this important brief.

It covers a few points that may have otherwise been missed, and brings them to the court's attention, especially attacking copies and duplicates and the shared component test we face here in Massachusetts, while also defusing some arguments about machineguns and the like, and addressing Miller.

This also addresses how Massachusetts considers modern r***es "dangerous and unusual" yet their very own police departments are taught that the "patrol r***e" is the superior defensive tool.

07/08/2026

This is the work we do, not for fame, not for glory, but for one person, hoping against hope that one case will be a catalyst for large scale change.

GOAL and Comm2A Attorney File Appeal in Boston Licensing Delay Case

https://www.goal.org/baasthomas2026

Following the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court’s denial of certiorari of Baas-Thomas v. Cox, and their remand of the case, Attorney Jason Guida has filed pleadings with Suffolk Superior Court. This appeal centers around a violation of the 40-day processing period for Licenses to Carry in the City of Boston. In the initial decision denying Mr. Baas-Thomas judicial review of the significant delay of his LTC application, the district court judge ruled that since the 40-day time clock had no significant punitive measure attached to it, that it could simply be disregarded. GOAL and Comm2A took extreme exception to that and ensured that Mr. Baas-Thomas would continue his case with the proper resources and representation with Attorney Jason Guida.

These pleadings are the continuation of that case to make sure the Commonwealth sees the error of their ways and stops treating the Second Amendment like a “second class right” by the Commissioner of the Boston Police Department and other licensing authorities throughout the state. “The Commissioner’s response to this litigation demonstrates a continuing indifference to the 2nd Amendment rights of the people he is sworn to serve," said Attorney Jason Guida in response to the Boston Police Commissioner.

“What bothers me the most is that the City of Boston attributes their backlog to the new online portal going live. We all know this is an unfiltered, unapologetic falsehood. To treat a civil right like this is unconscionable and exactly the sort of unjust infringement that the court system is supposed to make right,” said Chris Martel, President and Executive Director of Comm2A. “I am obviously not holding my breath, but with the way some attitudes are turning in courtrooms, even in the Commonwealth, there may actually be light at the end of this tunnel.”

“Honestly, I would have thought that the court’s initial ruling is outrageous enough to justify heading to the SJC, but these are Second Amendment rights in Massachusetts we’re discussing here,” said Mike Harris, Director of Public Policy for GOAL. “GOAL has been saying for years that the lack of an enforcement mechanism in the 40-day time clock would need to have some sort of reckoning and it looks like that time is here. It is just the indifference and hostility that the state government top-to-bottom treats a constitutional civil right that is so outrageous, the system is designed to hurt it citizens and that needs to stop.”

If all goes well, Attorney Guida expects oral arguments to be sometime this fall, likely September or October. GOAL and Comm2A will continue to keep you informed on this case’s progress.

01/16/2026

I read. I read more than most people I know. As the President and Executive Director of Comm2A, I read caselaw. I read court filings. I read the life stories of people stuck and chewed over by all three branches of government in the Commonwealth stacked against them.

Sometimes I am surprised by what I read, sometimes I am shocked, often I am dismayed.

I am working through a long held favorite book of mine and came to this passage.

“To read" actually comes from the Latin reri "to calculate, to think" which is not only the progenitor of "read" but of "reason" as well, both of which hail from the Greek arariskein "to fit." Aside from giving us "reason," arariskein also gives us an unlikely sibling, Latin arma meaning "weapons." It seems that "to fit" the world or to make sense of it requires either reason or arms.”
― Mark Z. Danielewski, House of Leaves

True or not, the author struck a nerve with me.

To find the path through the world as it sits today, arrayed against the individual and with the shouts of the many drowning out the voice of reason, the only way the folks in the middle will be able to stand against the cacophony of the rabble is to either be better educated, or be able to defend their positions with more than words alone.

Send a message to learn more

01/09/2026

This is interesting. Somehow, we didn't break community standards with any activity, however, we are restricted from being suggested to new folks.

Someone make this make sense.

12/10/2025

Hello Folks,

Comm2A and Gun Owners' Action League are in need of people who have applied for LTCs or FIDs in Boston since August.

https://comm2a.org/comm2a-and-goal-refer-ltc-delays-to-doj-for-civil-rights-investigation/

Comm2A and GOAL have spoken with folks at a higher level who are keenly taking a look at the fi****ms licensing process here in Massachusetts and have asked us to get as many impacted folks and their details over in a consolidated list though one of our attorneys.

If you are at all interested in sharing your story with them and helping us make changes here in Massachusetts, please reach out to the below email address with your details.

[email protected]

Times, dates, extra steps, please share as much as you can.

Thank you!

Comm2A filed Robinson et al v Mawn to halt delays in LTC processing enforcement of new training reqs before training was published