Assault Weapons Not Protected by 2nd Amendment, Fed Appeals Court Rules a year ago :)

Thebobo

Lifer
Jun 19, 2006
18,574
7,672
136
Fist I have to acknowledge that this is a year old story.

I think this a good step in the right direction. Its just one step but maybe with this decision other states can follow. I pasted a few of the articles paragraphs that I found interesting,

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-new...amendment-federal-appeals-court-rules-n724106

"ANNAPOLIS, Md. — 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...

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.

Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh, who led the push for the law in 2013 as a state senator, said it's "unthinkable that these weapons of war, weapons that caused the carnage in Newtown and in other communities across the country, would be protected by the Second Amendment."

"It's a very strong opinion, and it has national significance, both because it's en-banc and for the strength of its decision," Frosh said, noting that all of the court's judges participated.

free-vector-united-statesmaryland-clip-art_112159_United_StatesMaryland_clip_art_small.png


:lollipop:
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: allisolm

Atreus21

Lifer
Aug 21, 2007
12,001
571
126
You know I'm not the most ardent 2A supporter, but I wonder what Brian Frosh's opinion of the Virginia Tech shooting is, given that it was perpetrated with handguns.

How does Maryland's law define assault weapons?
 
  • Like
Reactions: a777pilot and KMFJD

Zorba

Lifer
Oct 22, 1999
15,613
11,256
136
You know I'm not the most ardent 2A supporter, but I wonder what Brian Frosh's opinion of the Virginia Tech shooting is, given that it was perpetrated with handguns.

How does Maryland's law define assault weapons?
The vast majority of mass shootings are done with semi-automatic rifles. The fact a few are done with handguns, doesn't mean there is no reason to restrict "assault weapons." But that logic, since some mass shooting are done with out automatic weapons, autos should be allowed.
 

interchange

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
8,031
2,886
136
I read the 2A differently but am glad that people who matter don't. I think it's shameful that meaningful gun legislation is so hard to even hit the debate floor despite a vast majority of Americans supporting it.
 

mdram

Golden Member
Jan 2, 2014
1,512
208
106
You know I'm not the most ardent 2A supporter, but I wonder what Brian Frosh's opinion of the Virginia Tech shooting is, given that it was perpetrated with handguns.

How does Maryland's law define assault weapons?

well before the law, assualt weapons required a wait

now you just put a heavy barrel on an ar15, do the 4473, and walk out with it
there is a list of guns that are too evil to own
the m1a is on it, but the ar10 is not
the ak is on it, but the mini 30 is not

its really a laughable law if you read it

oh and frosh is an idiot, proven fact


the case mentioned was appealed to SCOTUS, who declined to take it on. just like they declined the california appeal

eventually they will have to rule on something
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
53,300
47,683
136
the case mentioned was appealed to SCOTUS, who declined to take it on. just like they declined the california appeal

eventually they will have to rule on something

The court has not seemed interested in further dealing with gun issues since Heller.

As to the eventuality of them ruling on something might want to check in on the people who want Roe v. Wade struck down or drastically changed...take a seat, could be a while.
 

facetman

Senior member
Aug 30, 2014
201
4
81
Unfortunately - the 2nd amendment states very clearly - an armed "militia". Militia is a term for military armed soldier. So ya, it doesn't state the right for an armed farmer, hunter, not sportsman, etc. So, as weird as it sounds the second amendement clearly protects ALL GUNS (weapons) used for war - period. The government or anybody else cannot ( judges, presidents, etc.) pick and choose which gun, which clip, which scope,etc. So, to legally change this a constitutional amendment would need to be passed. So, lets get to it.
 

fleshconsumed

Diamond Member
Feb 21, 2002
6,486
2,363
136
The vast majority of mass shootings are done with semi-automatic rifles. The fact a few are done with handguns, doesn't mean there is no reason to restrict "assault weapons." But that logic, since some mass shooting are done with out automatic weapons, autos should be allowed.
And aside from well publicized mass shootings, most armed murders are done with handguns. By that logic all handguns should be banned/restricted. As despicable as these mass shootings are, assault rifle ban is nothing more than a feel good measure that hides the problem from the view. Say you ban these so-called assault rifles, say these assault weapon mass shootings go away. Say you saved 100 lives per year, now you infringed on the 2A of millions of law abiding gun owners, and you did nothing to address 15,000 handgun murders.

The assault weapon ban is treating the symptom instead of curing the cause. I'd rather see us talking universal healthcare which would provide way to address mental issues for everybody, I'd rather have us find a way to improve economic situation of the lower class as well as end war on drugs which would help with gang violence, I'd rather stop the divisive rhetoric that breeds violence against each other. But no, instead we'll just put a band aid on the problem and call it done. Thanks, but no thanks. That is not the right approach to the current problem.
 

IJTSSG

Golden Member
Aug 12, 2014
1,126
282
136
1. This ruling is in direct contradiction to Heller
2. Another good reason not to live in the sh!thole known as Maryland
 

mdram

Golden Member
Jan 2, 2014
1,512
208
106
How is it a proven fact?
Is it that you just don't like his decisions?
How does that make him an idiot?

i live in maryland, and have seen him over his career, you will just have to take my word on it
 

bshole

Diamond Member
Mar 12, 2013
8,315
1,215
126
You know I'm not the most ardent 2A supporter, but I wonder what Brian Frosh's opinion of the Virginia Tech shooting is, given that it was perpetrated with handguns.

How does Maryland's law define assault weapons?

The overall push should be to ban or severely restrict all semi-auto firearms. Even if that happens, America will probably still be a slaughterhouse. In general, Americans seem to be a violent hateful people. Far more so than rest of the first world.

  1. Protect and enhance wildlife habitat. Overgrazing by deer, rabbits, turkey or other creatures degrades wildlife habitat for all. Selective hunting can address this issue.
  2. Preserve the scenic and open spaces. Overgrazing degrades the natural landscapes. Selective hunting helps assure that native flora can remain viable.
  3. Conservation relationships. The hunting community is one of our greatest assets. By partnering with hunters we can protect and enhance our preserves.
  4. Nature-based recreation. Hunting has a great tradition in Wisconsin which is intergenerational. It may be the oldest nature-based recreational option enjoyed.
 

Thebobo

Lifer
Jun 19, 2006
18,574
7,672
136
1. This ruling is in direct contradiction to Heller

2. Another good reason not to live in the sh!thole known as Maryland

We the reasonable people of Maryland don't want foul mouth zealots like yourself here anyway.
 

Thebobo

Lifer
Jun 19, 2006
18,574
7,672
136
i live in maryland, and have seen him over his career, you will just have to take my word on it

Well I can't take you word for it since I disagree and I've lived here for 45+ years. I like the guy.
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
39,635
33,212
136
1. This ruling is in direct contradiction to Heller
2. Another good reason not to live in the sh!thole known as Maryland
Scalia disagrees with you. From his writings in the Heller decision
He wrote that the right to bear arms had limits. “Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.”The late justice also more generally offered the belief that “like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited.” It is “not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.”