Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Federal Judge Upholds State's Tough Assault Weapons Ban (CT's Whole Anti 2nd Law Upheld)
courant.com ^ | January 30, 2014 | EDMUND H. MAHONY

Posted on 01/30/2014 6:14:50 PM PST by raybbr

HARTFORD — Gun control advocates were buoyed Thursday by a federal court decision in Hartford that upholds Connecticut's toughest-in-the-nation assault weapons ban, calling it a constitutionally valid means of balancing gun rights and the government's interest in reducing gun violence.

"The court concludes that the legislation is constitutional," senior U.S. District Judge Alfred V. Covello wrote in a decision published late Thursday. "While the act burdens the plaintiffs' Second Amendment rights, it is substantially related to the important governmental interest of public safety and crime control."

The legislature enacted comprehensive restrictions on ownership of semiautomatic weapons and ammunition early last year in the emotionally charged weeks following the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown. Troubled gunman killed 20 first-grade students and six women with a now-banned AR-15 Bushmaster assault rifle his mother bought.

A coalition of gun owners, gun sellers and sports shooting organizations sued in U.S. District Court to block enforcement of the law and overturn it on constitutional grounds. The plaintiffs argued that the state's ban of 138 weapons and large-capacity ammunition magazines is vague, discriminates among different categories of gun users and, most significantly, infringes on their Second Amendment right to gun ownership.

(Excerpt) Read more at courant.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Front Page News; Government; US: Connecticut
KEYWORDS: 2a; 2ndamendment; alfredcovello; alfredvcovello; banglist; connecticut; gun; guncontrol; policestate
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-86 next last
To: anyone

For anyone interested [includes quotes from the judge on this case] . . .

Federal judge upholds Sandy Hook gun law

http://ctmirror.org/federal-judge-upholds-sandy-hook-gun-law/


41 posted on 01/30/2014 9:12:00 PM PST by deks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Rockpile

They are elitists for the most part - not too many William Buckleys left there.


42 posted on 01/30/2014 9:13:53 PM PST by ZULU (Magua is sitting in the Oval Office. Ted Cruz/Phil Robertson in 2016.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man
many in govt can’t handle the fact they have only limited power.

They have unlimited power, they don't have unlimited authority.

We are no better off than an abused wife holding up a restraining order to fend off her attacking husband.

43 posted on 01/30/2014 9:29:38 PM PST by itsahoot (It is not so much that history repeats, but that human nature does not change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

>
Alfred Covello


44 posted on 01/30/2014 9:30:30 PM PST by deks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: raybbr

“government’s interest in reducing gun violence”
No such animal exists. guns are by nature passive. and are completely devoid of human attributes. they are made of wood, metal, plastic. this is result of failing to educate. the judge is a stupid moron.


45 posted on 01/30/2014 9:30:56 PM PST by kvanbrunt2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye
Another FedMob judge who can’t read the Constitution.

He can read it, he just isn't constrained by it.

46 posted on 01/30/2014 9:33:06 PM PST by itsahoot (It is not so much that history repeats, but that human nature does not change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: ZULU

This clown makes it up as he goes along.


47 posted on 01/30/2014 9:33:12 PM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: INVAR

I’ve read a number of stories posted here on FR that an overwhelming majority of people are not registering their firearms and magazines. Hope it’s true.


48 posted on 01/30/2014 9:56:59 PM PST by Eagles6 (Valley Forge Redux)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; Bockscar; cardinal4; ColdOne; ...
"While the act burdens the plaintiffs' Second Amendment rights, it is substantially related to the important governmental interest of public safety and crime control."
IOW, government interest isn't constrained by the Constitution. Thanks raybbr.
49 posted on 01/30/2014 10:42:23 PM PST by SunkenCiv (http://www.freerepublic.com/~mestamachine/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Eagles6

50 posted on 01/31/2014 1:45:24 AM PST by Neil E. Wright (An OATH is FOREVER OathKeeper III We are EVERYWHERE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Neil E. Wright
See the article here.
51 posted on 01/31/2014 1:50:41 AM PST by Neil E. Wright (An OATH is FOREVER OathKeeper III We are EVERYWHERE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: ClayinVA

Covello was nominated to the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut by President George H.W. Bush on April 1, 1992. Meh.


52 posted on 01/31/2014 2:30:50 AM PST by Daffynition ("If you think you can do a thing or think you can't do a thing, you're right." ~ Henry Ford)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: raybbr
Covello:

"While the act burdens the plaintiffs' Second Amendment rights, it is substantially related to the important governmental interest of public safety and crime control."

Connecticut...the Constitution State. Meh.

"Obviously, the court cannot foretell how successful the legislation will be in preventing crime," Covello wrote. "Nevertheless, for the purposes of the court's inquiry here, Connecticut, in passing the legislation, has drawn reasonable inferences from substantial evidence."

Pass a law and we'll see what is in it.

Covello adopted the state's arguments that assault weapons are designed, not for cosmetic purposes, but for "lethality." And he referred to an affidavit by a state expert who asserted that "Connecticut's bans on assault weapons and large capacity magazines, and particularly its ban on (large capacity magazines), have the potential to prevent and limit shootings in the state over the long run."

Spin spin spin

Covello: "several provisions of the legislation are not written with the utmost clarity."

O RLY?


53 posted on 01/31/2014 3:02:53 AM PST by Daffynition ("If you think you can do a thing or think you can't do a thing, you're right." ~ Henry Ford)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eagles6

There are a bunch of newly minted felons in CT...that’s why people are leaving in droves.


54 posted on 01/31/2014 3:10:03 AM PST by Daffynition ("If you think you can do a thing or think you can't do a thing, you're right." ~ Henry Ford)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: raybbr

Take it to the USSC.


55 posted on 01/31/2014 3:11:57 AM PST by Biggirl (“Go, do not be afraid, and serve”-Pope Francis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD

Revolt is coming.


56 posted on 01/31/2014 3:22:08 AM PST by Biggirl (“Go, do not be afraid, and serve”-Pope Francis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: itsahoot
We are no better off than an abused wife holding up a restraining order to fend off her attacking husband.

I'm armed. I won't be abused.

/johnny

57 posted on 01/31/2014 4:42:23 AM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: SirFishalot
yup...
58 posted on 01/31/2014 4:47:29 AM PST by Chode (Stand UP and Be Counted, or line up and be numbered - *DTOM* -vvv- NO Pity for the LAZY - 86-44)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: ZULU

They can “ban” whatever they want.

Buy them anyway wherever you can, stash them away.

You’ll need them.


59 posted on 01/31/2014 5:27:16 AM PST by NFHale (The Second Amendment - By Any Means Necessary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: INVAR

“...we line up...”

Some do.

Others won’t.


60 posted on 01/31/2014 5:29:02 AM PST by NFHale (The Second Amendment - By Any Means Necessary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-86 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson