Libertarian ping! Click here to get added or here to be removed or post a message here!
Posted on 08/12/2014 3:39:23 PM PDT by bamahead
In what looks to be a terrible ruling for Maryland gun owners a federal judge has essentially ruled that guns that were regulated by the state of Maryland last year, including AR-15 and AK style rifles (as well as other magazine fed, semi-auto rifles with certain features), “fall outside Second Amendment protection as dangerous and unusual arms,” according to a 47 page opinion by U.S. District Judge Catherine C. Blake.
The case in question is Kolbe et al v. O’Malley et al which named numerous plaintiffs including the Associated Gun Clubs of Baltimore, Maryland Licensed Firearms Dealers Association, Maryland State Rifle and Pistol Association, and the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), among others which challenged the constitutionality of Maryland’s strict new gun laws.
Here are some of Blake’s other comments [emphasis mine],
Upon review of all the parties’ evidence, the court seriously doubts that the banned assault long guns are commonly possessed for lawful purposes, particularly self-defense in the home, which is at the core of the Second Amendment right, and is inclined to find the weapons fall outside Second Amendment protection as dangerous and unusual.
First, the court is not persuaded that assault weapons are commonly possessed based on the absolute number of those weapons owned by the public. Even accepting that there are 8.2 million assault weapons in the civilian gun stock, as the plaintiffs claim, assault weapons represent no more than 3% of the current civilian gun stock, and ownership of those weapons is highly concentrated in less than 1% of the U.S. population.
The court is also not persuaded by the plaintiffs’ claims that assault weapons are used infrequently in mass shootings and murders of law enforcement officers. The available statistics indicate that assault weapons are used disproportionately to their ownership in the general public and, furthermore, cause more injuries and more fatalities when they are used.
As for their claims that assault weapons are well-suited for self-defense, the plaintiffs proffer no evidence beyond their desire to possess assault weapons for self-defense in the home that they are in fact commonly used, or possessed, for that purpose.
Finally, despite the plaintiffs’ claims that they would like to use assault weapons for defensive purposes, assault weapons are military-style weapons designed for offensive use, and are equally, or possibly even more effective, in functioning and killing capacity as their fully automatic versions.
Blake further points out that so called “assault weapons” are “disproportionately represented in mass shootings”. Blake’s comments are misguided at best and it would seem difficult to weigh her opinion against the Supreme Court’s Heller decision.
Blake is a Bill Clinton appointed judge.
So I guess the Constitution only applied to muskets
The Libety Tree is in a great need of watering.
Guns are dangerous? And some are “unusual”??
Just DARN!
Guns are inherently dangerous when handled by idiots. Locked in a safe or even sitting on a table, they are perfectly innocuous. We cannot protect ourselves with puppies and sunshine...a fact this brainless buffoon obviously cannot comprehend.
The court is also not persuaded by the plaintiffs’ claims that assault weapons are used infrequently in mass shootings and murders of law enforcement officers. The available statistics indicate that assault weapons are used disproportionately to their ownership in the general public and, furthermore, cause more injuries and more fatalities when they are used.
So, using some of the reasoning in this ruling, one could argue that any protections for gays would be unusual, since they represent about 1 percent of the population...
Of course, the 2nd was never intended as a 'home defense' amendment; 'shall not be infringed' is pretty clear language. If these weapons were so unusual, they would not be mounted on the backs of police motorcycles, not to mention in patrol cars. 'Self defense', if that is the standard the government wants to take, includes defending oneself from the government. Hardly seems to be such a stretch that the people have the same firearms that the police think are necessary to carry out their jobs.
I think this judge comprehends that very well. Frighteningly well.
Hell, I’m dangerous and unusual if you ask the right people.
Time to stock up on AK’s.They are easier to clean and you can beat the crap out of them.
Yikes. Who’s going to force the police depts to destroy all of their AR-15’s?
Before there were liberals a person could own cannons.
time to remove that judge.
These judges all think they are emperors now
I guess modern printers and computers fall outside the first amendment to this moron
I have had more than 1 liberal say just that to me.
Too bad.
Molon Labe.
We are well past the time where it is necessary to remove judges from the bench.
Unusual? What BS to describe one of the most popular rifle models ever.
Dangerous? C’mon, there are thousands of useful products that are dangerous when used improperly.
This “judge” is dangerous and unusual.
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.