Get a load of this…
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.
Can I post that [JOKING!] vid in this context without getting SWATted by DHS or the department of education or somebody? Guess we’ll find out…
The court is not persuaded that civil rights are actually rights unless understood and authorized by the courts. Maroons. If you count the “assault” weapons in the hands of civilian law enforcement at local, state and federal levels, then they are a significant portion of the firearms in the public.
“Assault” weapons in the hands of law enforcement are much more likely to be used in assaults also.
Where did they find this “impartial” judge? I wonder if this idiot has ever heard about the law of unintended consequences?
I guess that, thanks to this judges’ logic, an argument could be made to end the use of computers in news reporting and protest writing on the internet and in the media. After all the first amendment protections of freedom of speech and freedom of the press should not cover the use of computers since they were not around when the amendments were written and would be considered unusual by those who drafted the first amendment in the first place.
Disregarding the fact that this twat conveniently forgot to read US v. Miller(1939), from a court that likely shaped her legal opinions on every other matter, we can also toss out the 8 million number.
Dimitri over at Ares Armor claims he has sold at minimum 100K 80% receivers. That’s just him in his little shop. There are literally hundreds of others retailing those lowers. There are probably 3 million of those alone. I know a vendor who sold 300 80% lowers in one day as a gun show.
Then figuring that the AR has been civilian available for close to 50 years, my dad bought one I wish I still had at fucking K-Mart of all places in the 70s; there are no less than 15 million of this particular rifle in public. I recall Bushmaster saying that prior to the latest California ban they had sold several million and at least several hundred thousand had been sent to California the year prior to that ban in 1999.
Since then there has been a HUGE influx of AR’s into just this state. Bitch, there’s 8 million AR’s in the people’s republic of Kalifornia alone.
That counts none of the other semi autos that fit the same roll. Like the M1A(peace be upon John Garand), AK, M1 Carbines(there are 3 million of those floating about)…..on and on.
That again does not include things like UZI or MAC firearms.