Finally: the Supreme Court will decide if common guns are really common - Is the very common AR-15 really common?

American Thinker ^ | 5 Jul, 2026 | Mike McDaniel

[MtnClimber]

The Supreme Court’s Heller decision in 2008 established that the Second Amendment is a fundamental, unalienable—God-given--right that does indeed acknowledge, but not grant, the right to keep and bear arms for lawful purposes such as self-defense. Unfortunately, the wheels of justice grind slowly, and it was not until 2022 that the Court handed down its Bruen decision, which affirmed that the right to bear arms extends to wherever Americans might be. What good is a right that can only be exercised in one’s home or on one’s property? Where is self-defense more likely, in one’s kitchen or out there in the wild, wild world?

While the Court did not define every issue involved, it did note that arms in “common use” are presumptively constitutional.

During those 14 years and beyond, anti-liberty/gun zealots wrote all manner of plainly unconstitutional laws to harass, bankrupt, and imprison gun makers and citizens in the expectation that if they made gun ownership too expensive, Americans would give up their guns. The opposite happened, and the more they tried to violate the Constitution, the more guns Americans bought, more than a million a month for many years.

Among the tactics employed against common firearms is labeling them “assault weapons.” And what might an “assault weapon” be? Generally, any gun anti-liberty/gun zealots want to ban. Specifically, they’ve focused on the exceedingly common AR-15, the most popular semiautomatic rifle in America, accounting for well over 20 million.

Graphic: Common AR-15 variant. Author.

SNIP

Now, to the horror of the self-imagined elite, the Supreme Court has agreed to hear two assault weapon ban cases in its next term:

SCOTUS will consolidate Viramontes v. Cook County, a Seventh Circuit (Illinois) case and Grant v. Higgins from the Second Circuit (Connecticut).

---

TOPICS: Society
KEYWORDS: banglist

[Fury]

What are the alternatives?

[Axenolith]

That statement is irrelevant to the right though. The state needs that (militia), and its availability is made convenient by the Right of the people to keep and bear arms but there is no encumbrance of the latter by the mention of the former.

Additionally, the state is remiss, nay... negligent, over its steady removal of all programs and trainings with firearms in educational settings. For decades a huge proportion of males came out of school with a fundamental understanding of the functioning and handling of firearms and would be readily available for “muster”. The Government, state or federal, doesn’t get to dismiss or evaporate an inherent right from policy stupidity.

[sauropod]

I’m not so sure.

[DoodleBob]

Oh, I am with you on the fading reliance of Roberts, Kavanaugh, and ACB, in that order, to be true to the Constitution. Obviously, the three leftists are not even up for debate and Alito, Thomas, and Gorsuch, in that order, are “safe.”

There is also the issue of the area of law. Like I wrote, the “conservative 6” seems pretty steadfast in their individual vs collective view of the 2nd Amendment. Per the one article to which I linked, between 2020- 2023 when ACB sided with 2 or more liberals, “These cases share common themes, in resolving disputes over regulatory and administrative law, economic regulation, state-federal authority conflicts, and taxation.”

When Roe was overturned, many people (rightly) cheered that Trump’s appointees voted appropriately. What was somewhat lost was that Roberts, while siding with the 6-3 majority on Dobbs, technically, didn’t vote to overturn Roe. His concurring opinion said, basically, “I am ok with reversing the Fifth Circuit in this case but we didn’t need to overturn Roe-that wasn’t before us.”

So, to be clear (and to be fair, since you’ve been fair), I am never convinced that we are in the clear on ANYTHING. Except The Holy Trinity. But following the data, while Roberts, Kavanaugh, and ACB are slouching away from originality, they remain “conservative” as a whole and pretty solid on the 2nd Amendment. Which, in an article titled “Finally: the Supreme Court will decide if common guns are really common - Is the very common AR-15 really common?” was a pretty important point of investigation.

But I wouldn’t bet on them.

Thank you for a cogent discussion. Be well.

[ealgeone]

We’re on the same page here. Like you, I’m hoping for the 6-3 win for the Constitution.

[oldeguy]

“I hunted pigs in Texas. My AR platform rifle in 308 was so light I could carry it on an all day hike and barely know it was there. My bolt action Winchester, however, was twice the weight. Sunk in a canoe accident though.”

Did you know that a wooden stocked rifle or shotgun will partially float stock up as the current carries it downstream? Helpful knowledge if you need to search the creek for one. LOL

[Big Red Badger]

Thanks for this message on ‘Militas’.
Being a Boomer I we still missed any training in school and little in USAF.

[coloradan]

They’re as heavy as ten moving boxes. Each one is that heavy.

[coloradan]

Presented before the court is the question of whether a common gun is a common gun.

[US_MilitaryRules]

All types of guns and armaments are common. It’s called the 2nd Amendment.

[Georgia Girl 2]

The AR15 is simply today’s Kentucky long rifle.

[paulcissa]

Chicago Typewriter.