Now illegal under the "test" required by the fourth Federal Circuit Court of Appeals. This is a "weapon most suited for use by the military;" it certainly has no discernible civilian use. They did not specify which military or when.
Posted on 02/22/2017 10:57:48 AM PST by nickcarraway
Maryland's ban on 45 kinds of assault weapons and its 10-round limit on gun magazines were upheld Tuesday by a federal appeals court in a decision that met with a strongly worded dissent.
In a 10-4 ruling, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia, said the guns banned under Maryland's law aren't protected by the Second Amendment.
"Put simply, we have no power to extend Second Amendment protections to weapons of war," Judge Robert King wrote for the court, adding that the Supreme Court's decision in District of Columbia v. Heller explicitly excluded such coverage.
Is there any type of weapon that can’t be used for assault?
Hmm. I thought the redcoats' target was colonial *gunpowder* (applicable to cannon, musket, rifle, pistol, whatever).
Actually, from a legal standpoint, always try to get away from and stay away from the entire Militia concept.
Had the second amendment simply said “The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” we would never have given out opponents the ability to claim that people at home are not a “well-regulated militia”
I never want the National Guard to be considered the “organized militia” or some group of 18 to 45 year-olds a militia of any kind. If that is true, we open the avenue for a rather persuasive legal argument that anyone not a member of those two groups does not have a Constitutional right to “keep and bear arms.”
If legislation makes the NG the organized militia, then other legislation can make it NOT the militia.
I guess this excludes weapons for the WAR ON DRUGS.
Exactly
I can change a few words “we have no power to extend First Amendment protections to speech the government opposes.” Let that sink in liberals.
And the constitution is there to limit the government not the people.
Yup.
Now illegal under the "test" required by the fourth Federal Circuit Court of Appeals. This is a "weapon most suited for use by the military;" it certainly has no discernible civilian use. They did not specify which military or when.
We air dropped one shot .45 ACP “Liberator” pistols to the French Resistance and others in WWII to fight the war with NAZI Germany. By this ruling even one shot pistols are “weapons of war.”
Any bill not passed by the ending of the session is dead. It has to be re-introduced in the new congress. That bill you are talking about is, if anything a ZOMBIE BILL. . . introduced by a Congress critter hoping to make points with his constituency. It never made it out of committee.
“...even for self defense in one’s home-the core Second Amendment right.”
Jeez - even the guys that get it right get it wrong. The 2nd does include self defense and was mentioned as a big reason at the time, but it was more to fight off ones OWN government if it became unlawful and unjust (like Britain had done).
"By calling attention to 'a well regulated militia,' the 'security' of the nation, and the right of each citizen 'to keep and bear arms,' our founding fathers recognized the essentially civilian nature of our economy. Although it is extremely unlikely that the fears of governmental tyranny which gave rise to the Second Amendment will ever be a major danger to our nation, the Amendment still remains an important declaration of our basic civilian-military relationships, in which every citizen must be ready to participate in the defense of his country. For that reason I believe the Second Amendment will always be important."President John F. Kennedy
---------------------------------------------------
"Certainly one of the chief guarantees of freedom under any government, no matter how popular and respected, is the right of citizens to keep and bear arms. This is not to say that firearms should not be very carefully used and that definite safety rules of precaution should not be taught and enforced. But the right of citizens to bear arms is just one more guarantee against arbitrary government, one more safeguard against a tyranny which now appears remote in America, but which historically has proved to be always possible."
Vice President and Senator Hubert H. Humphrey
Just for clarity and reference sake, I have included a link to the orders from General Gage to Lieut. Colonel Smith, 10th Regiment ’Foot.
No. An "assault weapon" is defined my law as a semi-automatic rifle, not full-auto.
Fully automatic or 3-round burst capable [assault] rifles feature a selector switch. They are issued to military.
>...Is it actually possible to buy an “Assault Weapon”? A full-auto M-4, AK, etc? Really....
Yes, in many states it is. Visit a Class 3 FFL licensee, go through an extensive background check. Get approval from the local law enforcement head, pay a federal transfer fee, and bring LOTS of cash.
>
Yes. None of which is an ‘infringement’ per the same unconstitutional triad.
I mean, it’s not like they won’t ALLOW one to purchase a full-auto, right? Just a few...hurdles. /s
Everything from ‘34 up as illegal and void as the day it was ‘passed’.
>
How can a court Constitutionally declare any of these firearms as “Weapons of war” when that term has not been clearly defined? It’s an opinion and open to interpretation. That definition would need to come from Congress for him to rule on whether on not those firearms fall within that scope.
>
The whole ‘gun control’ charade was begun on the Judiciary ‘defining’ such as these. IIRC, it was the sawed-off shotgun (trench sweeper) vs. barrel length. We are to be surprised that another step, in the totalitarian take-over, was taken??
We’ve had almost 100yrs. of Judicial tyranny, and not ONE person willing to stand up to ‘em (unless it was from the Left; packing the Court).
Removal from the bench has seemed to be only when the graft/corruption is so intense that it gives the public notice to the fallacy of the whole of govt. They stamp out that ember ASAP and the Public goes back into their lull of willful ignorance.
Yes, really!
Machine Guns Are Legal: A Practical Guide to Full Auto
Jump through the right hoops...
src="http://www.thespecialistsltd.com/files/NAClub.jpg" width = "700">
American Indian Stone War Club, c. 1750 (a "weapon of war," suitable for use by the Indian military.)
Every one of these is a "weapon of war," and would have failed the test the Fourth Circuit Court applied to the 2nd Amendment at one time or another. Every single one of these is an "assault weapon" because they can be used to assault someone or attack a military position.
The NRA will soon have a Congressional Bill it will be asking Paul Ryan to sponsor.
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.