Author Topic: Fed judge rules AR's "dangerous & unusual", not covered by 2nd Amendment  (Read 4290 times)

Balog

  • Unrepentant race traitor
  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 17,774
  • What if we tried more?
Quote from: French G.
I was always pleasant, friendly and within arm's reach of a gun.

Quote from: Standing Wolf
If government is the answer, it must have been a really, really, really stupid question.

Fitz

  • Face-melter
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6,254
  • Floyd Rose is my homeboy
    • My Book
Between the blatant falsehoods, and the contradiction of teh supreme's opinion, I think this is good for us... because it seems it'll get an epic smackdown
Fitz

---------------
I have reached a conclusion regarding every member of this forum.
I no longer respect any of you. I hope the following offends you as much as this thread has offended me:
You are all awful people. I mean this *expletive deleted*ing seriously.

-MicroBalrog

roo_ster

  • Kakistocracy--It's What's For Dinner.
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 21,225
  • Hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats
But of course the best-selling rifle in the USA is "unusual."
Regards,

roo_ster

“Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.”
----G.K. Chesterton

Boomhauer

  • Former Moderator, fired for embezzlement and abuse of power
  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 14,324
But of course the best-selling rifle in the USA is "unusual."

Only in OppositeMaryland


Quote from: Ben
Holy hell. It's like giving a loaded gun to a chimpanzee...

Quote from: bluestarlizzard
the last thing you need is rabies. You're already angry enough as it is.

OTOH, there wouldn't be a tweeker left in Georgia...

Quote from: Balog
BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD! SKULLS FOR THE SKULL THRONE! AND THROW SOME STEAK ON THE GRILL!

Tallpine

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 23,172
  • Grumpy Old Grandpa
Yeah, guns are dangerous  ;/
Freedom is a heavy load, a great and strange burden for the spirit to undertake. It is not easy. It is not a gift given, but a choice made, and the choice may be a hard one. The road goes upward toward the light; but the laden traveller may never reach the end of it.  - Ursula Le Guin

lee n. field

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 13,585
  • tinpot megalomaniac, Paulbot, hardware goon
http://gunssavelives.net/blog/court-cases/breaking-federal-judge-rules-ar-15s-are-dangerous-and-unusual-not-protected-by-2nd-amendment/

Seems like a pretty blatant disregard for Heller etc. I bet the Supremes won't care for that.

What was it heard it called?  Ah, "the Alan Gura summoning whistle."
In thy presence is fulness of joy.
At thy right hand pleasures for evermore.

TommyGunn

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 7,956
  • Stuck in full auto since birth.
A semiauto that shoots a .22 caliber bullet is "dangerous and unusual?" 
As others said: "if it's very popular."

I wonder what the judge would say about .338 Lapua, or .50BMG.   

MOLON LABE   "Through ignorance of what is good and what is bad, the life of men is greatly perplexed." ~~ Cicero

Perd Hapley

  • Superstar of the Internet
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 61,433
  • My prepositions are on/in
Because paramilitary weapons are obviously not covered by a law prefaced on arming a paramilitary.
"Doggies are angel babies!" -- my wife

Fitz

  • Face-melter
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6,254
  • Floyd Rose is my homeboy
    • My Book
Because paramilitary weapons are obviously not covered by a law prefaced on arming a paramilitary.

These jokers cant decide. Some cases, they say the 2a only covers military weapons (isn't that how the SBS stuff was upheld?), others, it's not
Fitz

---------------
I have reached a conclusion regarding every member of this forum.
I no longer respect any of you. I hope the following offends you as much as this thread has offended me:
You are all awful people. I mean this *expletive deleted*ing seriously.

-MicroBalrog

Balog

  • Unrepentant race traitor
  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 17,774
  • What if we tried more?
These jokers cant decide. Some cases, they say the 2a only covers military weapons (isn't that how the SBS stuff was upheld?), others, it's not

The original Miller decision was decided based on the reasoning that the particular model cut down shotgun had never been a military arm so it wasn't covered. But it explicitly stated that the point was to ensure civilians had military arms.

Every single ruling since then has completely ignored the precedent of Miller to use it to approve of laws grossly violating it.

Quote from: French G.
I was always pleasant, friendly and within arm's reach of a gun.

Quote from: Standing Wolf
If government is the answer, it must have been a really, really, really stupid question.

Hawkmoon

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 27,292
Re: Fed judge rules AR's "dangerous & unusual", not covered by 2nd Amendment
« Reply #10 on: August 12, 2014, 08:19:15 PM »
Circuit split? The judge who heard the challenge to the NY "SAFE" Act ruled that the AR-15 IS in customary, popular use.

Then he upheld the Draconian limits on ti anyway.
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
100% Politically Incorrect by Design

charby

  • Necromancer
  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 29,295
  • APS's Resident Sikh/Muslim
Re: Fed judge rules AR's "dangerous & unusual", not covered by 2nd Amendment
« Reply #11 on: August 12, 2014, 10:25:22 PM »
Between the blatant falsehoods, and the contradiction of teh supreme's opinion, I think this is good for us... because it seems it'll get an epic smackdown


Pretty much what I was thinking.
Iowa- 88% more livable that the rest of the US

Uranus is a gas giant.

Team 444: Member# 536

230RN

  • saw it coming.
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 18,896
  • ...shall not be allowed.
Re: Fed judge rules AR's "dangerous & unusual", not covered by 2nd Amendment
« Reply #12 on: August 13, 2014, 01:42:47 AM »
Reeks of personal opinion, not law.
WHATEVER YOUR DEFINITION OF "INFRINGE " IS, YOU SHOULDN'T BE DOING IT.

erictank

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,410
Re: Fed judge rules AR's "dangerous & unusual", not covered by 2nd Amendment
« Reply #13 on: August 13, 2014, 08:58:20 AM »
The original Miller decision was decided based on the reasoning that the particular model cut down shotgun had never been a military arm so it wasn't covered. But it explicitly stated that the point was to ensure civilians had military arms.

Every single ruling since then has completely ignored the precedent of Miller to use it to approve of laws grossly violating it.



This, in spades. They hate HATE HATE when you point that out to them, as well - "So, what you're saying is that I ought to be able to buy a select-fire Colt M-4 or M-16 for the exact same price as the military and law-enforcement pay? I remember a few years back seeing M-16s for sale to law-enforcement agencies at $500 a pop. Sounds good to me!"  >:D

As to the judge - "No, why SHOULD we consider a single semi-auto-only rifle design that constitutes something like 2% of ALL CIVILIAN-HELD FIREARMS IN THIS COUNTRY as 'common'? With literally MILLIONS of ARs in the hands of MILLIONS of people, why on EARTH should we consider such a rifle 'common'?"  :facepalm:

The smackdown ought to be nice, though. [popcorn]

NRA claims 5 million AR-type rifles in the US, as of late last year; closing on 2% of the total # of firearms in the US.

dogmush

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 13,910
Re: Fed judge rules AR's "dangerous & unusual", not covered by 2nd Amendment
« Reply #14 on: August 13, 2014, 09:13:34 AM »
Quote
NRA claims 5 million AR-type rifles in the US, as of late last year; closing on 2% of the total # of firearms in the US.

And her ruling was on "Assault weapons"  Throw in Ak's, PTR's, FAL's, M1A's, Mini 14's, Mini 30's, SKS's, HK's, etc. and it wouldn't surprise me at all to find that Mag fed semi auto rifles were closing on 8-10% of total guns.  Pretty common.

Scout26

  • I'm a leaf on the wind.
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 25,997
  • I spent a week in that town one night....
Re: Fed judge rules AR's "dangerous & unusual", not covered by 2nd Amendment
« Reply #15 on: August 13, 2014, 02:41:48 PM »
I guess I failed the math portion of the 2A.  :P


Some days even my lucky rocketship underpants won't help.


Bring me my Broadsword and a clear understanding.
Get up to the roundhouse on the cliff-top standing.
Take women and children and bed them down.
Bless with a hard heart those that stand with me.
Bless the women and children who firm our hands.
Put our backs to the north wind.
Hold fast by the river.
Sweet memories to drive us on,
for the motherland.

Tallpine

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 23,172
  • Grumpy Old Grandpa
Re: Fed judge rules AR's "dangerous & unusual", not covered by 2nd Amendment
« Reply #16 on: August 13, 2014, 03:06:55 PM »
I guess I failed the math portion of the 2A.  :P

Yeah, that and the exception for unusual weapons clause ...  ;/
Freedom is a heavy load, a great and strange burden for the spirit to undertake. It is not easy. It is not a gift given, but a choice made, and the choice may be a hard one. The road goes upward toward the light; but the laden traveller may never reach the end of it.  - Ursula Le Guin

Balog

  • Unrepentant race traitor
  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 17,774
  • What if we tried more?
Re: Fed judge rules AR's "dangerous & unusual", not covered by 2nd Amendment
« Reply #17 on: August 13, 2014, 03:43:00 PM »
If you own one of these unusual weapons prepare for the bans...

http://acidcow.com/pics/917-the-most-unusual-pistols-in-the-world-119-pics.html
Quote from: French G.
I was always pleasant, friendly and within arm's reach of a gun.

Quote from: Standing Wolf
If government is the answer, it must have been a really, really, really stupid question.

Hawkmoon

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 27,292
Re: Fed judge rules AR's "dangerous & unusual", not covered by 2nd Amendment
« Reply #18 on: August 13, 2014, 09:14:08 PM »
And her ruling was on "Assault weapons"  Throw in Ak's, PTR's, FAL's, M1A's, Mini 14's, Mini 30's, SKS's, HK's, etc. and it wouldn't surprise me at all to find that Mag fed semi auto rifles were closing on 8-10% of total guns.  Pretty common.

And this was in federal court. Someone needs to point out to her honor that there hasn't been a definition of "assault weapon" in federal law since 2004. And you can't look to the states, because each state that says anything about them defines them differently.

Idjit.
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
100% Politically Incorrect by Design

Hawkmoon

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 27,292
Re: Fed judge rules AR's "dangerous & unusual", not covered by 2nd Amendment
« Reply #19 on: August 13, 2014, 09:33:38 PM »
Why we need our "assault weapons":

http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/world/2014/08/13/pkg-watson-border-bridge-exodus.cnn.html

ISIS is a serious threat to the entire non-Muslim world, and I for one fully expect to see a lot of terrorist violence taking place in the U.S. sooner rather than later. Their leader said "See you in New York," and I have no doubt that he meant it. Instead of trying to take away our AR-15s, the .gov should be handing them out to every able-bodied American, male and female, and teaching them how to use it.

We need to follow the Swiss example, with a rifle in every home. And live up to the apocyphal tale of the Japanese admiral who supposedly said that Japan should not invade the American mainland because they would face a rifleman behind every blade of grass. God forbid that we should ever have to put that to the test, but it's possible.
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
100% Politically Incorrect by Design

MicroBalrog

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 14,505
Re: Fed judge rules AR's "dangerous & unusual", not covered by 2nd Amendment
« Reply #20 on: August 14, 2014, 03:11:32 AM »
That's what the unusual weapons language was put in Heller for.
Destroy The Enemy in Hand-to-Hand Combat.

"...tradition and custom becomes intertwined and are a strong coercion which directs the society upon fixed lines, and strangles liberty. " ~ William Graham Sumner

erictank

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,410
Re: Fed judge rules AR's "dangerous & unusual", not covered by 2nd Amendment
« Reply #21 on: August 14, 2014, 09:09:53 AM »
That's what the unusual weapons language was put in Heller for.

I suspect the "Honorable" judge is going to get slapped down on appeal.

Can't happen fast - or hard - enough.

charby

  • Necromancer
  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 29,295
  • APS's Resident Sikh/Muslim
Re: Fed judge rules AR's "dangerous & unusual", not covered by 2nd Amendment
« Reply #22 on: August 14, 2014, 09:11:39 AM »
I wonder how this judge would have ruled in the 1880's on lever guns? :)

Iowa- 88% more livable that the rest of the US

Uranus is a gas giant.

Team 444: Member# 536

Harold Tuttle

  • Professor Chromedome
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8,069
Re: Fed judge rules AR's "dangerous & unusual", not covered by 2nd Amendment
« Reply #23 on: August 14, 2014, 10:20:02 AM »
"The true mad scientist does not make public appearances! He does not wear the "Hello, my name is.." badge!
He strikes from below like a viper or on high like a penny dropped from the tallest building around!
He only has one purpose--Do bad things to good people! Mit science! What good is science if no one gets hurt?!"

AJ Dual

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 16,162
  • Shoe Ballistics Inc.
Re: Fed judge rules AR's "dangerous & unusual", not covered by 2nd Amendment
« Reply #24 on: August 14, 2014, 01:53:38 PM »
I wonder how this judge would have ruled in the 1880's on lever guns? :)



She'd have complained when her husband set it in the corner, instead of putting it where it belongs, on the pegs over the mantle, then gone back to tendin' the chilluns and makin' biscuits.
I promise not to duck.