[556x45]

Who didnt see this coming. The pretzel logic is painful.

[smokingfrog]

Another reason we need to oppose any new gun control legislation.

[fella]

Might I suggest that these judges take the time to read what the writers of the 2nd amendment said what it means.

[Brooklyn Attitude]

IIRC miller decision was the result of the defendant not showing up to defend their right to possess a Sawed off shotgun. The fact that short barreled shotguns were commonly used by the military was not presented to the justices.

[G Larry]

Well then, perhaps this court is prepared to define the difference between a modern hunting rifle and an AK, without using the phrase “looks scary”.

[PowderMonkey]

"...for lawful purposes such as hunting or self-defense."

Hmm...I must have overlooked that wording in the 2nd amendment. Probably right next to where its says "musket loaders only."

[greeneyes]

In a day and age where drug cartels roam freely in parts of the US armed with real AK 47s for example, their own statement in support of self defense requires support for citizens to be equally armed.

Besides the 2cnd amendment doesn’t say anything about exceptions to this right. They get an F for the their decision.

[CrazyIvan]

When the 2nd amendment was written all rifles were assault rifles.

[Nifster]

And they will be proven wrong....California courts are a joke

[Brooklyn Attitude]

Next the CA SC will decide that guns other than black powder guns are not “arms” therefore not protected. Later one or more members of the CA SC will be appointed to the USSC and rule the same way. I would say we are on a slippery slope but there is NO SLOPE. Its just straight DOWN.

[deks]

The court’s ruling is on this page. . .

http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/2013/10/ca-court-appeal-holds-second-amendment-doesnt-protect-semi-autos/

[2ndDivisionVet]

So we just treat California, Maryland and New York as if they are outside of the United States? Works for me.

[jeffc]

Wow! What a serious misrepresentation and interpretation of the 2A. Obviously, these "judges" are unaware of the history behind the 2A, that or they don't care.

And "self defense"? What do these "judges" think self defense is? What if you have to "self defense" yourself against a tyrannical government (you know, like the one not mentioned in the 2A!)?

[Hardraade]

Actually, the AK’s protected by the second amendment would be the fully automatic ones. With optional grenade launcher.

[servo1969]

“the right secured by the Second Amendment is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose”

Actually, that’s EXACTLY the right it is meant to secure. Morons.

[Red in Blue PA]

[Regulator]

for lawful purposes such as hunting or self-defense

Actually the intent was to shoot the soldiers of a tyrannical government (like the King of England), but why bother pointing that out to a guy who would have been a Tory then.

[Calamari]

A case of:

The 2nd amendment means what ever we say it means not what is written there, you stupid peasants.

[driftdiver]

And yet “assault weapons” are among the least powerful firearms a person can purchase.

but they look mean

[Azeem]

This should be overturned unless the government is going for the complete disarmament. You have to wonder why they are so eager to strip citizens of any weapon. What are they afraid of?

The United States Supreme Court already defined (MANY years ago) the weapons under the 2nd Amendment. Notice, they say nothing of hunting or self-defense. BTW, AKs make good hog hunting rifles.

United States v. Miller (1939)

In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a "shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length" at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument.