Posted on 02/06/2016 8:32:39 AM PST by Wildbill22
In a major victory for gun rights advocates, a federal appeals court on Thursday sided with a broad coalition of gun owners, businesses and organizations that challenged the constitutionality of a Maryland ban on assault weapons and other laws aimed at curbing gun violence.
A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit said the state's prohibition on what the court called "the vast majority of semi-automatic rifles commonly kept by several million American citizens" amounted to a violation of their rights under the Constitution.
"In our view, Maryland law implicates the core protection of the Second Amendment -- the right of law-abiding responsible citizens to use arms in defense of hearth and home," Chief Judge William Traxler wrote in the divided ruling.
Provisions that outlaw these firearms, Traxler wrote, "substantially burden this fundamental right."
(Excerpt) Read more at huffingtonpost.com ...
I would argue that the definition of what is a ‘battle rifle’ is quite arbitrary to the times and the needs. The M-1 Garand was the best rifle of WW2 by many accounts. That standard is not what is considered the best today. A different set of ‘needs’ is desired, resulting in the M-4 or civilian AR-15, or AK.
It isn’t up to anyone but the individual what their ‘needs’ are. If I don’t harm anyone unjustly with what I consider my ‘needs’, then constitutionally nobody can define those needs.
I would hope that the editors and many writers of the Huffington Post WOULD HAVE aneurisms, strokes, heart attacks, gallstone attacks, hemorrhoids, and sterility.
At one time the HuffPost was a readable place of liberal and leftist stuff. Today it has moved even further Left and is now a place of Marxist crap.
Poor little rich Arianne. You could have been a contender. How you’re just JV.
While I don’t believe in abortion, while it is still legal I would hope liberals would abort themselves out of existence. At least SOME good would come from that tragedy.
Shall not be infringed. The left squeals and blows a gasket every time a state wants voter ID laws. The Democrats argue that it places an undue burden on the poor even with provisions for free ID. I think that every law abiding citizen should be free to keep and bear arms without any taxes or fees. Especially any type or style of weapon that is used by law enforcement. Taxes, fees, Assault Weapon bans all infringe upon the rights of the people. It would be nice if a court would rule in a similar manner and actually find that fees and special taxes are unlawful.
“In our view, Maryland law implicates the core protection of the Second Amendment — the right of law-abiding responsible citizens to use arms in defense of hearth and home,” Chief Judge William Traxler wrote in the divided ruling.
Well if that’s the case then Chief Judge William Traxler is
an idiot and has no idea what the true meaning on the
second amendment is. I’m sure foreign invasion and keeping
the government in check never entered his mind.
Precsely. ALL “weapons” should be legalized.
The founding fathers specifically used the word “arms” for a reason.
They knew there would be advances in technology with new
weapons. Their definition of arms was anything one man
can carry.
The right to bare arms is the right of the people to
protect themselves from foreign invasion and their own government.
Really? One major aspect of the training of an infantry squad during the Vietnam era was keeping most of the men firing semi-auto, rather than full auto. One man in each 4 man fireteam was designated as the "automatic rifleman". The other three fired semi-auto. I NEVER fired full auto during combat in Vietnam. It doesn't take long to expend all your ammo if you're firing full auto. Then what are you going to do?
The M-16 fires ammunition at a rate of 700=950 rounds per minute. I carried 500 rounds. We once went well over a week without resupply. Ran out of food. I was down to 120 rounds, which I shared with buddies who were out of ammo. Full auto ain't all it's cracked up to be when you are running low on ammo!
"Sergeant York, was one of the most decorated soldiers of the United States Army in World War I. He received the Medal of Honor for leading an attack on a German machine gun nest, taking 32 machine guns, killing at least 20 German soldiers, and capturing 132 others.
During the assault, six German soldiers in a trench near York charged him with fixed bayonets. York had fired all the rounds in his M1917 Enfield (bolt action) rifle, but drew his .45 Colt (semi)automatic pistol and shot all six soldiers before they could reach him."
I'd say that Sgt. York's actions fall under the classification of "military assault." His rifle was "trigger-bang-work the bolt-trigger-bang", the other was "trigger-bang, trigger-bang, trigger-bang".
The Courts were never GIVEN this much power. Like all things govt, they usurped. With no push-back (just HOW many judges have been removed from the bench since our Founding?...Maybe hands and feet??), they presumed more powers than authority granted.
Lastly, (no offense ahead of time), I loathe the term ‘allowed to keep our Rights’. Rights are inalienable. Govt can merely suppress. We the People are the FINAL arbiters of what and what is not Constitutional, for w/out We there IS no govt.
Black robed oligarchs is correct. Unfortunately, I have heard little in their election season to suggest it will change anytime soon.
The definition has little to nothing to do with “needs” under the 2nd Amendment, nor my comment.
The military had a definition for a battle rifle, and the “assault rifles” we’re too puny to meet those needs, especially lacking in range, and power...which is the exact opposite of the impression most people have.
Most people have this silly idea - from the name - that “assault weapons” are big powerful weapons, and that “military rounds” are especially powerful and damaging, when the opposite is true: they fall into the lower end of hunting rifles (large varmint), in many states are not considered powerful enough to humanely kill deer and thus not legal to hunt deer with for that reason, and the military rounds they use are jacketed in order to limit fragmentation compared to typical hunting rounds.
That case was heard by the USSC without any opposing arguments. Miller had disappeared and his lawyer could not afford the cost of printing the appeal. Flawed from the start. Relates to the NFA of 1934 which is another “piece of work”.
Yeah...the Court found that trench guns (shotguns) had no known military application. Layers of stupid.
I have had an AR-15 for years now, my favorite rifle, hence my interest in the subject.
I agree with you in saying the 2nd amendment has nothing to do with “needs”.
My point with the issue of “Needs” is that nobody and no government has a right to define my “needs”.
When someone says “what do you need that for” or “you don’t need that” the only response from a freedom loving individual is “mind your own business”. Or perhaps I might point out what exactly their real needs are, which is one meal a day and a 9 by 9 cell and a bucket to crap in. Liberal/socialist/Marxist consequence of equality at the lowest common denominator.
Freedom is to define your needs wants and dreams. And you don’t have to justify anything to anyone as long as you don’t infringe on anyone else’s constitutional rights.
Agreed.
The NFA and lots of other gun laws are equally unconstitutional.
That’s fine. We were answering different questions...and yeah, that “needs” argument people use is reprehensible - especially when third -parties are attempting to apply it.
Exactly. I have a fundamental right to a rifle that’s short and quiet too.
But the amendment simply acknowledged the need for and desirability of having a militia; it said nothing about restricting arms to members thereof.
In New Jersey to obtain a carry permit (which in itself is an infringement) you are required to prove a need. Unless you are "connected" the proof of need is never sufficient.
Bit Ditto!
WTF is an assault weapon?>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Ask Joe Biden, he is into shot guns.
bkmk
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.