Supreme Court Rejects Gunmakers' Appeal

KRON ^ | September 4, 2003 | Associated Press

[FreedomCalls]

WASHINGTON (AP) - Two gunmakers who challenged Congress' authority to ban the manufacture, sale and possession of semiautomatic assault weapons lost a Supreme Court appeal Monday.

The court, without comment, rejected an appeal that said Congress exceeded its power to regulate interstate commerce when it outlawed such weapons in 1994.

The 1994 law, an amendment to the Gun Control Act of 1968, defines semiautomatic assault weapons to include a list of specified firearms and ``copies or duplicates of the firearms in any caliber.''

Navegar Inc. and Penn Arms Inc. challenged the federal ban in 1995.

Florida-based Navegar, doing business as Intratec, manufactures two semiautomatic pistols, the TEC-DC9 and TEC-22, which are among the specifically banned weapons.

Pennsylvania-based Penn Arms makes the Strike 12, a 12-gauge revolving cylinder shotgun. All such shotguns are treated as semiautomatic assault weapons under the 1994 law.

A federal trial judge and the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia upheld the ban. In its ruling last year, the appeals court called the law a permissible ``regulation of activities having a substantial effect on interstate commerce.''

The appeals court cited Congress' ``intent to control the flow through interstate commerce of semiautomatic assault weapons bought or manufactured in one state and subsequently transported into other states.''

In the appeal acted on Monday, the gunmakers argued that the appeals court ruling conflicts with recent Supreme Court decisions that pared congressional power by narrowing the definition of interstate commerce.

In one, the Supreme Court said Congress exceeded its authority in banning possession of guns within 1,000 feet of schools. In another, the court struck down a key provision of the Violence Against Women Act.

The gunmakers' appeal said the appeals court wrongly presumed that ``the manufacture and transfer of semiautomatic assault weapons was for a national market.''

They said the appeals court ``had no basis for concluding ... that the intrastate manufacture, transfer or possession of semiautomatic assault weapons had a substantial effect on interstate commerce.''

Justice Department lawyers urged the court to reject the appeal. ``Federal regulation of firearms and assault weapons is based in large part on evidence that the nationwide market for firearms renders purely local prohibitions ineffective,'' they said.

The case is Navegar v. U.S., 99-1874.

[FreedomCalls]

Gosh you're right. Again I apologize. I got the tip from USENET "GunNewsDaily News And Commentary" dated 09/04/2003. I followed their link and KRON's posting appeared to have today's date on it. The copyright date does give it away.

I'll be more careful next time.

[lawdog]

You missed the " shall not be infringed " part ! I'm sure that the British Army would have liked for the colonists to have possessed inferior quality arms ; a view apparently not far removed from yours.

It seems the fed courts are determined to wield powers it does not constitutionally possess. The fed courts use the "commerce clause" argument out of the same whole cloth as the "establishment clause"; one to incrementally whittle the Second, the other to purge religion from the public square.The centralization of power is almost complete.

[FreedomCalls]

Here's the original link:

http://www.kron4.com/Global/story.asp?S=142796

The story is in the center of the page with today's date at the top and below it are list of "Latest KRON4's Headlines" and "National News." So I hope you can see how I was confused. IMO It is a poorly designed web page to insert archived material into a frame with today's material.

[Destro]

Without the 2nd Ammendment we are slaves---ready to get your collar size measured?

May someone tell me why I vote Republican if this is the result? Maybe Rush Limbaough was right and it has all been for nothing.

[FreedomCalls]

Ashcroft allows this type of irrational & stupid argument to take place on his watch? - Crazy.

My bad. Given the date on this, it happened on Reno's watch not Ashcroft's.

I apologize if you were misled. Keep voting Republican.

[tpaine]

We have fallen in love with a beautiful woman who has been presented to us as a chaste woman of worth. --
-- I feel like I'm seventeen years old being dumped all over again by someone who wasn't what I thought she was.

Hmmmmm... Ya got me a bit nonplussed..

Ya see, -- I've ~never~ had any illusions about 'chaste' women, or 'honest' politicians.. Maybe I was born a cynic.

In any case, I think our systems original intent had checks & balances built in, -- to keep politicians from ~serious~ longlasting evils.

That system is being perverted by gullible men, who keep believing the republocrat political whores enough to vote for them. --- We have met the enemy, - he is all around us.

[Sloth]

It was a dumb argument. Doesn't matter if it was interstate commerce or not, the 2nd Amendment specifically prohibits Congress from passing such laws to begin with.

[RobbyS]

It is not the possesion of such arms that is the problem but that they may be turned against the state.
In Iraq we see the potential for mischief.

[AAABEST]

Justice Department lawyers urged the court to reject the appeal.

UN-FRIGGIN-BELIEVABLE.

[DoughtyOne]

I don't mind you seeing it differently. I did have high hopes for our nation. I don't see what our founding fathers could have done better to provide for us. I do recognize the weakness of our system, but I never expected to reach a place when I would be faced with the situation I have in my own state now. We're more than likely going to be faced with voting for a blatant RINO or a racist separatist. What do you do short of marching on the capital to change this?

Thanks for the comments.

[tpaine]

We're more than likely going to be faced with voting for a blatant RINO or a racist separatist. What do you do short of marching on the capital to change this?
-DT-



Vote to shake up the system... As I said here, on another thread:

Arnold to .50 Owners: "You are terminated." ^
 
  Posted by tpaine to William Tell
On News/Activism ^ 09/04/2003 7:24 PM PDT #85 of 87 ^


There is nothing pragmatic about voting for an anti-gun actor who is pro-gay, pro-abortion, and who thinks the state of Kalifornia should only be limited in spending by what it can "afford".
84 -WT-



The pramatism is in shaking up the 'system', just as happened in Minnesota with the election of Jesse the clown.

-- IE, - I see their recent CC bills passage as a direct result of the Minn political revolt against the Republocratic regime.

[Squantos]

Agree.............SCOTUS ain't !

Stay Safe !

[DoughtyOne]

So anotherwords we let the democrat win? Look, if you want a racist separatist to control your state go for it. I don't.

[DoughtyOne]

Wonderful

[metesky]

The gunmakers' appeal said the appeals court wrongly presumed that ``the manufacture and transfer of semiautomatic assault weapons was for a national market.''

Notice that the Kulturesmog has gotten so great that even these dipstick gunmakers have bought the "semiautomatic assault weapon" scam?

Ain't no such thing and the manufacturers should have said so.

[wita]

Can I argue that point about our political system being flawed. I believe that concept sheds bad light on the founders and is untrue. I would be more eager to agree that elected individuals and bureaucrats in government are flawed and have been going along to get along, by bending and shaping government to suit their desires for more than two centuries. The willing masses with their hands out are also part of the problem, not necessarily the political system. As Pogo used to say,...

[Redbob]

"These fools have never read the Constitution.

Two exceptions, of course: Scalia and Thomas. The rest are fools or idiots, or, in the case of Sandy-Day, both.

[Redbob]

"It is not the possesion of such arms that is the problem but that they may be turned against the state."

That, my friend, is precisely the strongest argument FOR the ownership of 'assault weapons' - or, if you prefer, 'homeland defense weapons.'

What could be more effective in defending your humble abode from a mob of jack-booted thugs than a Spas-12 (Striker 12)?