Posted on 02/06/2016 8:32:39 AM PST by Wildbill22
In a major victory for gun rights advocates, a federal appeals court on Thursday sided with a broad coalition of gun owners, businesses and organizations that challenged the constitutionality of a Maryland ban on assault weapons and other laws aimed at curbing gun violence.
A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit said the state's prohibition on what the court called "the vast majority of semi-automatic rifles commonly kept by several million American citizens" amounted to a violation of their rights under the Constitution.
"In our view, Maryland law implicates the core protection of the Second Amendment -- the right of law-abiding responsible citizens to use arms in defense of hearth and home," Chief Judge William Traxler wrote in the divided ruling.
Provisions that outlaw these firearms, Traxler wrote, "substantially burden this fundamental right."
(Excerpt) Read more at huffingtonpost.com ...
How do people eat a steak without stabbing themselves with an assault knife?
Rant off
“But the term “well regulated militia” means that this is not an unorganized rabble; it means they get “regular” practice, drill”
You mean National Guard, it seems.
Regulated and regulating us a term that us unclear. It was used differently back then.
Hats off to the 4th circuit, once again!
Exactly. “Assault weapon” is an entirely arbitrary category. I’ve read the 2nd Amendment a number of times. I don’t remember there being any qualifiers in there.
when the founders said well regulated I think the meant clear thinking, not vigilantes
Bottom line is that you cant regulate this stuff away
But then, that's simple logic - something that the court often avoids at all costs.
They made the term up.
As someone said upthread what about assault cars?
Well that’s just stupid, so why do we allow the term assault gun?
Good!
On all accounts.
Politically correct description of a defensive firearm...in defense of LIBERTY.
Or it meant well armed.
There is no reason rocket launchers and anti aircraft weapons should not be in the hands of citizens if the 2nd Amendment is for defense of the citizenry when the Army needs help or can’t do it.
I would submit it is not unconstitutional to ban hunting, but is to disallow private ownership of anti-aircraft weapons.
I have a shotgun that runs 20 rounds lickety split.
Why?
Because maybe I need 20 ducks now or maybe because I can.
Why does a man need a 600 HP car if the speed limit is 55?
Why would he need 7 such cars?
The wider answer is because this is America and we reserve the right to freedom
Amen
Well "it seems" is incorrect. I was referring to the original language and the meaning of each term used in the 2A in its historic context. Yes, individuals owned ships with cannon in those days. I do understand what a letter of marque was and what it implied, and have in fact advocated its use for purging illegals and Muslim terrorists.
At that time "regulated" meant to make frequent, common, and usual, literally something for government to facilitate not hinder. The NG is among the models of that idea in terms of being regulated, but by no means did it mean that the NG was meant to be exclusive of other private ownership of arms.
So your original implications were correct historically with the omission that the Founders really did mean for the States to maintain organized militias, but they are problematic when applied today with the amount of technical integration and capital costs necessary to mount a national defense. A private person could buy a B-1B, but I seriously doubt anybody could afford the development costs. It's just reality. So I do think we need to revisit the concept of a national defense, but I don't trust the current crop of "legislators" to do it.
Sucks, doesn't it?
From what I understand; it means well armed and preferably well trained.
Basically it is our duty as Americans to be well armed and trained in the use of those arms in case we are needed to defend our country.
Or be it a sword, a knife or bow. Arms and the 2nd apply to all weapons.
Assault Weapons
Wet water
Automobile Cars
Highway roads
Female woman
Male man
Bovine cows
Equine horses
Game Changer, coming up.
I once read an essay from an historian that said we really have distorted the meaning of the words in the 2nd Amendment.
*A well regulated militia* really means that the people must always be able to regulate and contain the militia. Having the people possess the identical firepower of the militia was a sure way to suppress (and outnumber) the militia in the event of a military take-over.
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.