The 7th Circuit holds that AR-15s aren’t protected by the Second Amendment

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2023/11/the_7th_circuit_holds_that_ar15s_arent_protected_by_the_second_amendment.html ^ | 5 Nov, 2023 | Andrea Widburg

[MtnClimber]

The “logic” behind the opinion is so asinine and juvenile that it could only come from judges.

Illinois desperately wants to ensure that, within the state’s borders, only criminals have guns. When it comes to law-abiding citizens, the state will do anything to disarm them. That includes passing a law that pretty much bans “assault weapons” (a non-existent category that really covers AR-15s, America’s most popular gun) and large-capacity magazines (which really do exist). A federal district court issued an injunction against that part of the law, but a three-judge panel reversed the injunction on grounds that are so asinine and juvenile that they could come only from judges.

The three-judge panel in Barnett v. Raoul (Case No. 23-13530 consisted of a Reagan appointee, a Clinton appointee, and a Trump appointee. Only the latter supported the trial court. The other two judges came up with some astounding logic. I’ve summarized the judges’ logic, along with my commentary (in bolded text).

1. The Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller, which protects an individual’s right to keep and bear arms irrespective of active involvement in a formal militia, said that the Second Amendment is not a completely unlimited right. This is true. Heller said that.

2. The Heller decision said that the arms meant to be protected under the Second Amendment were those that were not dedicated solely to military use but were of the type that ordinary citizens would ordinarily have. To that end, the court held that “the Second Amendment does not protect those weapons not typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes….” America’s law-abiding citizens own around 20 million AR-15s, which they use for law-abiding purposes.

[MtnClimber]

Here we go again.

[Mark17]

How about AK-47s? 😁

[eeriegeno]

OK so they don’t like the designation AR-15! Change the designation to SPD-1 (1st Self Protection Device). Problem solved.....

[Flavious_Maximus]

The 2nd amendment enshrines the right of citizens to own ANY weapon that the police have.

If a SWAT team can carry AR-15’s then so can I. It is my GOD GIVEN RIGHT!

During the 1700’s, the Continental Army carried musket guns that were ALSO available to citizens. A farmer had the SAME firepower as the soldier, and hereby citizens members of the unorganized militia, to this day.

[rktman]

appointees or (s)elected? Guessing appointees. Guess joemenita was right huh? Bill of Rights items aren’t absolute. Anybody for abridging, oh, say the 13th or 19th amendments? After all, they aren’t absolute......... fjb

[Sacajaweau]

That’s absurd. It’s only the design that they’re looking at. It’s a regular gun...

[angrymarine]

Gun owners would like a national registry of socialists, marxists, hamas sympathizers, soft on crime advocates, soros recipients and open borders advocates. Ththe registry to be curated and held by the NRA and accessible to members in good standing.

[BlackbirdSST]

At some point some hapless soul is going to be ordered to come and police these firearms up. I wouldn’t want to be any of those people.

[where's_the_Outrage?]

Bump stocks can turn the AR-15 into a fully automatic weapon.

WTF???

[bk1000]

Judges gotta learn. We are tired of their activist nonsense. There will be a spark one day…

[FlingWingFlyer]

These idiots need to show us where it says in the Bill of Rights that AR-15s are not protected by the Second Amendment. It isn’t in there. These boneheads need to stay in their lane.

[Pajamajan]

bttt

[Bounced2X]

How about AK-47s? 😁
OK so they don’t like the designation AR-15! Change the designation to SPD-1 (1st Self Protection Device). Problem solved.....

Good point. For those who want to throw nomenclature around the "modern" version is AKM-47 (Russian: Автомат Калашникова Модернизированный; Avtomat Kalashnikova Modernizirovanniy or "Kalashnikov modernized automatic rifle"). Technically AK-47s haven't been manufactured since 1959.
The big difference is the original AKs' receiver was milled from a solid piece of steel. The AKM is stamped metal. Much easier, faster and cheaper to manufacture. It's also much lighter.
I almost bought one many years ago. It was milled. All the full auto parts had been removed except the full auto bolt carrier. The pins supporting those parts were retained to plug the holes in the receiver. A hole was drilled and a pin inserted in the full auto detent to prevent the selector lever from engaging that.

The Type 3 receiver has a long shallow groove machined into both sides to save weight.

The stamped receiver of the AKM can be readily identified by the pressed-in dimples that hold the magazine steady.

AKM VS. AK-47: WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE?

[mabarker1]

BU££$}{!T !!!

[Mark17]

OK so they don’t like the designation AR-15! Change the designation to SPD-1 (1st Self Protection Device). Problem solved.....

Good point. 👍

[mabarker1]

It’s only the design Shape that they’re looking at.

[joshua c]

they wont collect

the gun owner will be cut off electronically

[OKSooner]

Thank you for the helpful information.

[Sacajaweau]

Yes.....should have been more exact...