Started By
Message

re: No Federal Appeals Court Has Held Assault-type Weapons are 2A Protected.

Posted on 2/22/18 at 1:22 pm to
Posted by Damone
FoCo
Member since Aug 2016
32966 posts
Posted on 2/22/18 at 1:22 pm to
quote:

the right of self-defense protected by the Constitution.

Where in the constitution does it limit the Second Amendment to self-defense?
Posted by texridder
The Woodlands, TX
Member since Oct 2017
14944 posts
Posted on 2/22/18 at 1:27 pm to
quote:

You’re an embarrassment to the state of Texas.


Nuns have guns under their habits in Texas.
Posted by texridder
The Woodlands, TX
Member since Oct 2017
14944 posts
Posted on 2/22/18 at 1:30 pm to
The Supreme Court in November 2017 declined to review the 4th Circuit decision cited in the OP.
Posted by Centinel
Idaho
Member since Sep 2016
45929 posts
Posted on 2/22/18 at 1:31 pm to
quote:

weapons that are most useful in military service — M-16 rifles and the like — may be banned


What can an M-16 do that AR-15 can't? I'll even give you a hint: There are two correct answers.

Posted by texridder
The Woodlands, TX
Member since Oct 2017
14944 posts
Posted on 2/22/18 at 1:34 pm to
quote:

Where in the constitution does it limit the Second Amendment to self-defense?

Where in the constitution does it limit the First Amendment right of free speech?
Posted by BarberitosDawg
Lee County Florida across causeway
Member since Oct 2013
13193 posts
Posted on 2/22/18 at 1:34 pm to
quote:

No Federal Appeals Court Has Held Assault-type Weapons are 2A Protected


That's because 'assault weapon' is an oxymoron, moron...

Posted by GeneralLee
Member since Aug 2004
14128 posts
Posted on 2/22/18 at 1:34 pm to
Need to wait until Trump gets another justice on SCOTUS before this gets overturned. No confidence in Kennedy at this point, heck I bet he would vote to overturn Heller even though he was part of the original opinion!
Posted by Damone
FoCo
Member since Aug 2016
32966 posts
Posted on 2/22/18 at 1:36 pm to
quote:

Where in the constitution does it limit the First Amendment right of free speech?

So you agree on limiting all Constitutional freedoms?
Posted by ChineseBandit58
Pearland, TX
Member since Aug 2005
49520 posts
Posted on 2/22/18 at 1:37 pm to
quote:

assault-type weapons


If we painted them day-glo orange would that be ok?
Posted by ljhog
Lake Jackson, Tx.
Member since Apr 2009
20583 posts
Posted on 2/22/18 at 1:41 pm to
I only have one question. Who is going to come take anything, firearm or other wise, that I own?
Posted by udtiger
Over your left shoulder
Member since Nov 2006
115347 posts
Posted on 2/22/18 at 1:55 pm to
And no Supreme Court has said they're not.
This post was edited on 2/22/18 at 1:56 pm
Posted by CptBengal
BR Baby
Member since Dec 2007
71661 posts
Posted on 2/22/18 at 1:56 pm to
has the OP describe assault-type weapons yet?
Posted by texridder
The Woodlands, TX
Member since Oct 2017
14944 posts
Posted on 2/22/18 at 1:58 pm to
To further clarify my improper use of the description "Assault-type weapons" in the OP, the Maryland statute provided:

The FSA provides that a person may neither “transport an assault weapon into the State” nor “possess, sell, offer to sell, transfer, purchase, or receive an assault weapon.” See Md. Code Ann., Crim. Law § 4-303(a).

The banned assault weapons include “assault long gun[s]” and “copycat weapon[s].” Id. § 4-301(d).

The FSA defines an assault long gun as a rifle or shotgun “listed under § 5-101(r)(2) of the Public Safety Article,” including the “Colt AR-15,” “Bushmaster semi-auto rifle,” and “AK-47 in all forms.” See Md. Code Ann., Crim. Law § 4-301(b); Md. Code Ann., Pub. Safety § 5-101(r)(2).

The list of prohibited rifles and shotguns in Md. Code Ann., Crim. Law § 4-301(b)consists of “specific assault weapons or their copies, regardless of which company produced and manufactured that assault weapon.”

See Md. Code Ann., Pub. Safety § 5-101(r)(2) (emphasis added).1

1 The rifles and shotguns specifically identified as banned in section 5-101(r)(2) — mostly semiautomatic rifles — are as follows:

(i) American Arms Spectre da Semiautomatic carbine; (ii) AK-47 in all forms; (iii) Algimec AGM-1 type semi-auto; (iv) AR 100 type semi-auto; (v) AR 180 type semi-auto; (vi) Argentine L.S.R. semi-auto; (vii) Australian Automatic Arms SAR type semi-auto; (viii) Auto-Ordnance Thompson M1 and 1927 semi-automatics; (ix) Barrett light .50 cal. semi-auto; (x) Beretta AR70 type semi-auto; (xi) Bushmaster semi-auto rifle; (xii) Calico models M-100 and M-900; (xiii) CIS SR 88 type semi-auto; (xiv) Claridge HI TEC C-9 carbines; (xv) Colt AR-15, CAR-15, and all imitations except Colt AR-15 Sporter H-BAR rifle; (xvi) Daewoo MAX 1 and MAX 2, aka AR 100, 110C, K-1, and K-2; (xvii) Dragunov Chinese made semi-auto; (xviii) Famas semi-auto (.223 caliber); (xix) Feather AT-9 semi-auto; (xx) FN LAR and FN FAL assault rifle; (xxi) FNC semi-auto type carbine; (xxii) F.I.E./Franchi LAW 12 and SPAS 12 assault shotgun; (xxiii) Steyr-AUG-SA semi-auto; (xxiv) Galil models AR and ARM semi-auto; (xxv) Heckler and Koch HK-91 A3, HK-93 A2, HK-94 A2 and A3; (xxvi) Holmes model 88 shotgun; (xxvii) Avtomat Kalashnikov semiautomatic rifle in any format; (xxviii) Manchester Arms “Commando” MK-45, MK-9; (xxix) Mandell TAC-1 semi-auto carbine; (xxx) Mossberg model 500 Bullpup assault shotgun; (xxxi) Sterling Mark 6; (xxxii) P.A.W.S. carbine; (xxxiii) Ruger mini-14 folding stock model (.223 caliber); (xxxiv) SIG 550/551 assault rifle (.223 caliber); (xxxv) SKS with detachable magazine; (xxxvi) AP-74 Commando type semi-auto; (xxxvii) Springfield Armory BM-59, SAR-48, G3, SAR-3, M-21 sniper rifle, M1A, excluding the M1 Garand; (xxxviii) Street sweeper assault type shotgun; (xxxix) Striker 12 assault shotgun in all formats; (xl) Unique F11 semi-auto type; (xli) Daewoo USAS 12semi-auto shotgun; (xlii) UZI 9mm carbine or rifle; (xliii) Valmet M-76 and M-78 semi-auto; (xliv) Weaver Arms “Nighthawk” semi-auto carbine; or (xlv) Wilkinson Arms 9mm semi-auto “Terry.”
Posted by texridder
The Woodlands, TX
Member since Oct 2017
14944 posts
Posted on 2/22/18 at 2:03 pm to
quote:

So you agree on limiting all Constitutional freedoms?


I am not aware of a constitutional right that is not limited in some way. (Sessions-type denial).
Posted by Centinel
Idaho
Member since Sep 2016
45929 posts
Posted on 2/22/18 at 2:05 pm to
quote:

Ruger mini-14 folding stock model (.223 caliber)


But not the fixed stock model. This tells me all I need to know.



ETA: You ever going to answer my question about the M-16 vs. the AR-15?
This post was edited on 2/22/18 at 2:06 pm
Posted by UpToPar
Baton Rouge
Member since Sep 2008
22970 posts
Posted on 2/22/18 at 2:05 pm to
quote:

The Heller Court specified that “weapons that are most useful in military service — M-16 rifles and the like — may be banned” without infringement upon the Second Amendment right.


You want to put this into context, or are you going to pretend that this is really what the court said?

For those interested, the full quote that he is attempting to pass off as the Court permitting the ban of these rifles is below:

quote:

It may be objected that if weapons that are most useful in military service—M-16 rifles and the like—may be banned, then the Second Amendment right is completely detached from the prefatory clause. But as we have said, the conception of the militia at the time of the Second Amendment’s ratification was the body of all citizens capable of military service, who would bring the sorts of lawful weapons that they possessed at home to militia duty. It may well be true today that a militia, to be as effective as militias in the 18th century, would require
sophisticated arms that are highly unusual in society at large. Indeed, it may be true that no amount of small arms could be useful against modern-day bombers and
tanks. But the fact that modern developments have limited the degree of fit between the prefatory clause and the protected right cannot change our interpretation of the right.
This post was edited on 2/22/18 at 2:07 pm
Posted by texridder
The Woodlands, TX
Member since Oct 2017
14944 posts
Posted on 2/22/18 at 2:07 pm to
quote:

And no Supreme Court has said they're not.

The Supreme Court in November 2017 declined to review the 4th Circuit decision cited in the OP.
Posted by Dawgfanman
Member since Jun 2015
26314 posts
Posted on 2/22/18 at 2:07 pm to
quote:

I am not aware of a constitutional right that is not limited in some way.


None of the others say “shall not be infringed”
Posted by Rekamyah
Ovadalevee
Member since Jun 2008
1866 posts
Posted on 2/22/18 at 2:11 pm to
My kitchen drawer is FULL of assault weapons. Guess I'll have to start eating with my hands. Wait, I'm a seventh degree black belt...........gotta cut off my hands and feet.
Posted by texridder
The Woodlands, TX
Member since Oct 2017
14944 posts
Posted on 2/22/18 at 2:13 pm to
quote:

None of the others say “shall not be infringed”



The First Amendment uses the "abridged" as to speech.

quote:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech,
first pageprev pagePage 2 of 6Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram