Federal judge upholds Massachusetts assault weapons ban

The Hill ^ | 04/06/18 | Morgan Gstalter

[Simon Green]

Federal judge upholds Massachusetts assault weapons ban © Getty Images

A federal judge dismissed a lawsuit on Friday challenging Massachusetts's ban on assault weapons.

U.S. District Judge William Young said in his ruling that the firearms and large magazines banned by the state in 1998 are “not within the scope of the personal right to ‘bear Arms’ under the Second Amendment.”

The features of a military-style rifle are "designed and intended to be particularly suitable for combat rather than sporting applications," Young wrote.

Massachusetts was within its rights since the ban passed directly through elected representatives, Young decided.

“Other states are equally free to leave them unregulated and available to their law-abiding citizens,” Young wrote. “These policy matters are simply not of constitutional moment. Americans are not afraid of bumptious, raucous, and robust debate about these matters. We call it democracy.”

The lawsuit was filed last year by the Gun Owners Action League of Massachusetts, who claimed the law infringed on their Second Amendment rights.

Attorney General Maura Healey (D), a defendant in the suit, said the ban “vindicates the right of the people of Massachusetts to protect themselves from these weapons of war.”

“Strong gun laws save lives, and we will not be intimidated by the gun lobby in our efforts to end the sale of assault weapons and protect our communities and schools,” Healey said in a Facebook statement. “Families across the nation should take heart in this victory.”

State laws on firearms have been under increased scrutiny since the Parkland, Fla., school shooting in February, which left 17 dead.

After the shooting, Florida Gov. Rick Scott (R) signed new restrictions raising the age limit for gun purchases from 18 to 21 and imposing a three-day waiting period for the sale of most long guns. The National Rifle Association promptly filed a lawsuit against the Florida law.

Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker (R) said in the aftermath of the Feb. 14 mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School that he would support a federal ban on assault-style weapons.

[PIF]

Actually I’ve seen something like you describe somewhere, but still the ammo and powder is heavy. Perhaps canister or grape shot, but then that would be a single shot shotgun. How fast can you load 00 Buck?

[TADSLOS]

U.S. District Judge William Young

Agent of the Crown

Enemy of the People and The Sons of Liberty

[Renegade]

Time to just start eliminating the threat.

[old curmudgeon]

The militia. Is a sport?

[Bob434]

[[The features of a military-style rifle are “designed and intended to be particularly suitable for combat rather than sporting applications,” Young wrote.]]

You’re damn right they are meant for combat- we intend to combat ANY criminal hell bent on doing us harm- the second amendment is NOT about sporting events- it’s about self protection using the most effective means necessary!

[Bob434]

[[This so-called Judge has written an absurd decision based on an irrelevant criterion of his own invention.]]

Exactly- but then again supreme court justice john roberts gave an even more ridiculous opinion about obamacare- one so ridiculous that lawyers just shook their heads in disbelief- yet obamacare became law- facts don’t matter anymore- agenda is all that matters to the left-

[Ancesthntr]

The “sporting purposes” nonsense started with the 1968 Gun Control Act (and the language thereof was taken, pretty much verbatim after translation, from the Nazi weapons law of the 1930s that disarmed any potential opposition there.

However, the 2nd Amendment predates 1968 by quite a bit - and “sporting purposes” is not something considered (except as a side benefit) by the Founders when drafting or ratifying the 2nd. That Amendment is about one thing, and one thing ONLY - maintaining in the hands of the population at large the ability to do in the then-future what they, themselves, had done only 15 years earlier: overthrow a tyrannical government. They were setting up a government of, by and for the people - and understood from their studies of history and their own personal experience that power is oftentimes abused, and sometimes to the point of justifying a separation from a prior authority (see the Declaration of Independence for the “why” of justified revolt).

This judge is ONLY a District Court judge. The ruling needs to be appealed to the Circuit, and then to the Supremes if not ruled upon correctly. Box magazine-fed semi-auto rifles are VERY commonplace, and if you add in pistols with similar operating functions then you are looking at a majority of firearms sold for the last few decades, and possibly a majority of firearms existing in civilian hands in this nation. “Heller” says that you CANNOT just ban an entire class of firearms in common use.

[whistleduck]

Nope. The militia at the time of our founding always armed themselves with sporting rifles only.

Anything else when battling redcoats or Indians or Barbary pirates just would not have been sporting.

[Beagle8U]

“I wonder how our Revolutionary War would have turned out, if the Minutemen had only been able to use sling-shots?”

Well, if their first shot missed, those British soldiers would be in a world of hurt if facing farmers armed with Wham-o wrist-rockets and a pocket full 00 buckshot.

I doubt Brits could even reload taking fire from modern slingshots.

[Bob434]

[[case law already settled that 2a is not about merely sport hunting.]]

Based on that ruling, the case mentioned in this article should be overturned as it seems that this was the criteria used by the judge to allow the ban to stand- The 2n’d A is about self protection, not sporting events- This judge had no right defying the supreme court’s decision on the matter-

[Ancesthntr]

The stupidity is astounding.

the 2nd Amendment isn’t about duck hunting.

[fortes fortuna juvat]

>>The features of a military-style rifle are “designed and intended to be particularly suitable for combat rather than sporting applications,” Young wrote.<<

This judge has decided incorrectly why the 2nd Amendment was adopted, which was specifically in reference to militias and therefore to the use of firearms in combat and self-defense situations. Militias are not formed for the purpose of “sporting applications”! His decision must be appealed.

[Bob434]

United States v. Miller, 307 U. S. 174, does not limit the right to keep and bear arms to militia purposes, but rather limits the type of weapon to which the right applies to those used by the militia, i.e., those in common use for lawful purposes.

Note that civilian ownership of ‘militia style guns’ are actually protected under the 2n’d Amendment.

[dware]

Meh...he got nothing to worry about. I mean, I realize gun owners like to piss and moan, but in the end, they ain’t going to do squat, despite the fact this judge should be strung up about the head and neck. Who cares, though, right? It’s only the 2nd Amendment. We got 9 more of them!

[Ancesthntr]

“When the 2nd Amendment was enacted, military style rifles is exactly what most people at the time had.”

---

Some people also owned ships, armed with cannon - and the Founders were not only fine with that, but they put that in the Constitution when listing the powers of the Congress in Article 1, Section 8. Specifically, Congress may issue “Letters of Marque and Reprisal.” What are those? Basically, Congressional authorization to attack and plunder the commercial and military ships of an enemy nation. You weren’t going to attack a British ship of the line, which might have 50 or more cannon, with a rowboat full of musketeers...you NEEDED cannon, and the Founders KNEW THAT. This had been authorized by the Continental Congress, and private citizens with their privately-owned cannon (the closest 18th Century equivalent to a “weapon of mass destruction”) responded and acted.

Oh, and the Kentucky Rifle of the era was SUPERIOR to the “Brown Bess” musket fielded by the British Army...so, yes, you are correct about the “military-style” rifles owned by colonists during the Revolution.

Let’s hope that Ruth “Buzzi” Ginsburg meets the Founders, that Kennedy also retires, and that Trump apppoints 2 Originalist Justices, before this case gets to the Supremes.

[dware]

This judge and his ruling and the governor that supports it needs to be hanged. It is coming to that.

It came to that a looooong time ago, but there ain't anyone gonna do a doggoned thing, because there are NO patriots alive today, I don't care how much hot air some gas bag with a bunch of guns blows up your rear.

[dware]

I am quite aware of the usurpation. The Twentieth Amendment, Section Three PROVED he was a usurper. It also proved that Congress was in on the game.

And how many so-called "oathkeepers" held to their oath? Because if they DID stand by their oaths, he never would have made it 8 years.

[suthener]

You have to jump through hoops to own a sawed off shotgun BECAUSE it is not a military weapon. Now you can’t own an AR style sporting rifle because it’s too much LIKE a military weapon.

Summary of ruling United States vs. Miller:
The Supreme Court reversed the district court, holding that the Second Amendment does not guarantee an individual the right to keep and bear a sawed-off doublebarrel shotgun. With Justice James Clark McReynolds writing for the majority, the Court reasoned that because the possession of a sawed-off double barrel shotgun does not have a reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia, the Second Amendment does not protect the possession of such an instrument.

[fortes fortuna juvat]

>>Strong gun laws save lives.. WRONG !
ask Chicago, Detroit, NY etc.....<<

Just yesterday or the day before, 7 people were shot to death in a 12-hour period on the south side of Chicago. Too bad the judge wasn’t . . . well, you know what I mean.

[Mathews]

I never saw the words “sporting” or “hunting” in the 2A. It was written with only one premise in mind... To defend or COMBAT a tyrannical government.