BREAKING: Federal Judge Rules AR-15s Are “Dangerous and Unusual,” Not Protected by 2nd Amendment

Guns Save Lives ^ | August 12, 2014 | Dan Cannon

[bamahead]

Honestly sounds like Dianne Feinstein herself ghost-wrote the decision...

[bamahead]

Libertarian ping! Click here to get added or here to be removed or post a message here!

[Fai Mao]

So I guess the Constitution only applied to muskets

[Renegade]

The Libety Tree is in a great need of watering.

[stephenjohnbanker]

Guns are dangerous? And some are “unusual”??

Just DARN!

[Politicalkiddo]

Guns are inherently dangerous when handled by idiots. Locked in a safe or even sitting on a table, they are perfectly innocuous. We cannot protect ourselves with puppies and sunshine...a fact this brainless buffoon obviously cannot comprehend.

[kingu]

First, the court is not persuaded that assault weapons are commonly possessed based on the absolute number of those weapons owned by the public. Even accepting that there are 8.2 million assault weapons in the civilian gun stock, as the plaintiffs claim, assault weapons represent no more than 3% of the current civilian gun stock, and ownership of those weapons is highly concentrated in less than 1% of the U.S. population.

The court is also not persuaded by the plaintiffs’ claims that assault weapons are used infrequently in mass shootings and murders of law enforcement officers. The available statistics indicate that assault weapons are used disproportionately to their ownership in the general public and, furthermore, cause more injuries and more fatalities when they are used.

So, using some of the reasoning in this ruling, one could argue that any protections for gays would be unusual, since they represent about 1 percent of the population...

Of course, the 2nd was never intended as a 'home defense' amendment; 'shall not be infringed' is pretty clear language. If these weapons were so unusual, they would not be mounted on the backs of police motorcycles, not to mention in patrol cars. 'Self defense', if that is the standard the government wants to take, includes defending oneself from the government. Hardly seems to be such a stretch that the people have the same firearms that the police think are necessary to carry out their jobs.

[Wyrd bið ful aræd]

"We cannot protect ourselves with puppies and sunshine...a fact this brainless buffoon obviously cannot comprehend."

I think this judge comprehends that very well. Frighteningly well.

[cripplecreek]

Hell, I’m dangerous and unusual if you ask the right people.

[Renegade]

Time to stock up on AK’s.They are easier to clean and you can beat the crap out of them.

[CivilWarBrewing]

Yikes. Who’s going to force the police depts to destroy all of their AR-15’s?

[mountainlion]

Before there were liberals a person could own cannons.

[drypowder]

time to remove that judge.

[GeronL]

These judges all think they are emperors now

[GeronL]

I guess modern printers and computers fall outside the first amendment to this moron

[ChildOfThe60s]

I have had more than 1 liberal say just that to me.

[fatnotlazy]

Clinton appointee. Nuff said.

[NFHale]

Too bad.

Molon Labe.

[RightOnTheBorder]

We are well past the time where it is necessary to remove judges from the bench.

[grumpygresh]

Unusual? What BS to describe one of the most popular rifle models ever.
Dangerous? C’mon, there are thousands of useful products that are dangerous when used improperly.
This “judge” is dangerous and unusual.