Supreme Court won’t review laws banning assault weapons

Washington Post ^ | December 7, 2015 | Robert Barnes

[TroutStalker]

That could be because a majority of the court thinks the restrictions are legally justified or because the court is closely divided and neither side is sure of what the outcome of taking a case might be.

[goodnesswins]

Yeah...San Bernardino should have banned them.../s

[henkster]

If there is a split of opinion among the Federal Circuits about this issue, the Court will be inclined to grant certiorari when it comes up again.

[Drew68]

Not unusual. The Supreme Court has never reviewed any of the several local and statewide assault weapons bans.

[DJ MacWoW]

Make FR Green For Christmas

Click The Pic To Donate

[stockpirate]

SCOTUS is as corrupt as the WH and Congress.

[xzins]

We need to stop using “semi-automatic” and describe these as not machine guns. This is not a machine gun. It only shoots one shot at a time.

[Robert A Cook PE]

Would be yet another 5-4 (one-man dictatorship!) "new law" created by the Court.

[Pollster1]

Laws infringing on the individual, God-given right to keep and bear arms, including AR-style rifles with standard-capacity magazines (or whatever magazine capacity a United States citizen decides to keep and bear), are clearly unconstitutional. I hope the Supreme Court will review those laws within the next few years.

[Yo-Yo]

Please, please, PLEASE fix the FR problem with quotes and apostrophes.

[Lurking Libertarian]

SCOTUS ping. (Note that this is a denial of cert., not a decision on the merits, albeit with two dissents).

[PJammers]

Best thing to do is for victims and families of victims join in class action suits against big business.

Say for instance a company has a gun free zone policy on their property and someone was victimized on the way or on their property, They should be sued based on the fact that you could not defend yourself.

[going hot]

We need to stop using “semi-automatic” and describe these as not machine guns. This is not a machine gun. It only shoots one shot at a time.

grabbers do not care. It is merely a way fro them to further divide into little bite size bits to better enable them to "convince" the masses that THOSE have to go.

Don't fall for it. Support your God given right to defend yourself, the functionality of the tool is immaterial, except for how effective it may be in your hands.

[drypowder]

This SCOTUS operates solely to protect the DC establishment's mandates, it does nothing to protect the people's freedom nor our Constitution. Thus again, the very reason for the 2nd amendment.

[houeto]

Please, please, PLEASE fix the FR problem with quotes and apostrophes.

All posters have to do is delete and retype them in the 'preview'. Problem solved.

[LaRueLaDue]

To pedantically correct, all guns shoot one shot at a time. It is just a matter of whether a single trigger pull initiates more than one shot.

[null and void]

all guns shoot one shot at a time

[CatOwner]

If you're wanting to create extra work for posters, sure.

This wasn't a problem in the past. Why won't the software accept alternate forms of punctuation marks now?

[meatloaf]

Let’s hope that’s after several of the SCOTUS members have been retired and replaced by true conservatives.