Court Finds "Assault Weapons" Are Constitutional!

[ltorlo64]

Ok, so there is much more work to do but a Federal Court has told a lower court that they need to revisit Maryland's recent ban on "assault weapons" and high capacity magazines. What is really great is the comments that are being posted on HUFFPO. It seems as though people are actually starting to understand the Constitution.

In a major victory for gun rights advocates, a federal appeals court on Thursday sided with a broad coalition of gun owners, businesses and organizations that challenged the constitutionality of a Maryland ban on assault weapons and other laws aimed at curbing gun violence.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/peo...GB2?li=BBnb7Kz

[rci2950]

This is good news!

[alismith]

This is good news. Of course, the Left will just get another ruling from a different Circuit Court that is more anti-gun than this one.


Even though this Court turned ruled against the MD law on the grounds that it isn't Constitutional, that won't stop the Left from their overall objective of getting rid of any, and all, guns.

The left doesn't care about the Constitution anyway.

[Helen Keller]

huge monkey wrench in the dems plans.

[Hatedbysheeple]

This is what happened to East coast gun grabbers today.

[sevlex]

This is what happened to East coast gun grabbers today.

Damn you to Hell!!!

Now I have to wipe off my screen and shake up a new martini!

[copterdoctor]

Another article on the same subject:
http://www.wbaltv.com/news/appeals-c...18304#comments

[Helen Keller]

we are impeding Maryland's and others' reasonable efforts to prevent the next Newtown - or Virginia Tech, or Bingamton, or Fort Hood, or Tucson, or Aurora, or Oak Creek, or San Bernardino," he wrote.

oh fucking eat shit................. we know the facts..

If all they had was a butter knife they would have done the same against the helpless sheep.

[Schuetzenman]

This is what happened to East coast gun grabbers today.

Made me seriously LOL on this one!

[Hatedbysheeple]

So unfortunately Maryland and DC are the only two states in the 4th circuit court of appeals that this directly affects, since the rest would never pass this stuff. However now that this is precedent, if a lawsuit was brought up to the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd circuit court of appeals would they fall back on this decision or make their own ruling?

map I found

[Helen Keller]

PA sucks for dem stuff.... but for rights we will burn you................ and you'll have to get enough votes to surpass our constitiution.

[T2K]

Back and forth the ball bounces...today it bounced our way.

I worry about a "review" of Heller in the future, with a different SCOTUS.

[tank_monkey]

So unfortunately Maryland and DC are the only two states in the 4th circuit court of appeals that this directly affects, since the rest would never pass this stuff. However now that this is precedent, if a lawsuit was brought up to the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd circuit court of appeals would they fall back on this decision or make their own ruling?

map I found

We should do what the LIBTARDS do. Use the courts to fuck up the other side.

Remember, the California Voters banned Same Sex Marriage (Prop 8) and a pole smoking Activist Judge threw it out. California Voters banned giving benefits to illegal immigrants (Prop 187) and the courts emasculated it. California Voters banned Affirmative Action (Prop 209) and the liberals in colleges found ways around it.

If a liberal judge can pretty much thwart the will of the people, then why not the other way around? Why can't judges force LEFT leaning state legislatures to stop fucking with the people's rights?

[Hummer]

Well its for sure those judges won't ever be considered for the Supreme Court unless we really clean house this coming November and I would love to see that.

[ltorlo64]

So unfortunately Maryland and DC are the only two states in the 4th circuit court of appeals that this directly affects, since the rest would never pass this stuff. However now that this is precedent, if a lawsuit was brought up to the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd circuit court of appeals would they fall back on this decision or make their own ruling?

Don't know if they have to follow it, but they have to consider it. I also think this kind of ruling could set this up to be decided by the Supreme Court if one of the other Circuit Courts finds differently on a similar case (which I am sure they already have). Once there is a difference of opinion between two or more circuit courts the SCOTUS then is supposed to step in an decide for them so that we are all working from the same rules.

[ltorlo64]

Back and forth the ball bounces...today it bounced our way.

I worry about a "review" of Heller in the future, with a different SCOTUS.

I do as well, but once a SCOTUS rules one way it is more difficult to get the court to change the precedent. Does not mean it won't happen, but it is harder. But that fear is really just the price of maintaining our freedom. We can never stop watching, working, fighting and educating people if we want to maintain our liberty and freedom. There will never be a time on this earth when we can stop defending freedom and liberty from those, even in our own country and government, who would seek to enslave us and act as a tyrant. We see many of them being considered seriously for president and we will see more when we get closer to the election and the candidates for every other political position are identified.

[1 Patriot-of-many]

Circuit Judge Robert King is a giant douchebag. Of course he would be the one to dissent, a clinton appointee. I have to wonder which antigun group wrote the dissent for him (pages 67-90) http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/doc...-weapons/1852/

Half of what he says is pure nonsense, made up facts. The other half twists the ruling of Heller 180 degrees concerning automatic weapons, I tried to cut and paste some key excerpts from this commie who shit's on his oath but couldn't for some reason. I highly suggest reading the dissent.... It's laughable and full of shit on almost every point.


Here's two: The banned assault rifles and shotguns constitute no more than 3% of the civilian gun stock, and ownership of such weapons is concentrated in less than 1% of the U.S. population. At the same time, assault weapons are used disproportionately
to their ownership in mass shootings and the murders of police officers, and they cause more fatalities and injuries than other firearms.

(“In the case of machine guns, nobody has argued, before or since, that ordinary citizens used these weapons for lawful purposes, and so they have been rightly deemed not to fall within the ambit of the Second Amendment. Had there been even a small amount of citizens
who use them for lawful purposes,then the Second Amendment might have covered them.”).

[ltorlo64]

Well its for sure those judges won't ever be considered for the Supreme Court unless we really clean house this coming November and I would love to see that.

That is for sure. Wouldn't want justices who read, followed, and made rulings based on what the Constitution says as that would be a threat to the government. Not to freedom and liberty, but to the current administration and about half of the federal politicians.

[ltorlo64]

Circuit Judge Robert King is a giant douchebag. Of course he would be the one to dissent, a clinton appointee. I have to wonder which antigun group wrote the dissent for him (pages 67-90) http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/doc...-weapons/1852/

Half of what he says is pure nonsense, made up facts. The other half twists the ruling of Heller 180 degrees concerning automatic weapons, I tried to cut and paste some key excerpts from this commie who shit's on his oath but couldn't for some reason. I highly suggest reading the dissent.... It's laughable and full of shit on almost every point.


Here's two: The banned assault rifles and shotguns constitute no more than 3% of the civilian gun stock, and ownership of such weapons is concentrated in less than 1% of the U.S. population. At the same time, assault weapons are used disproportionately
to their ownership in mass shootings and the murders of police officers, and they cause more fatalities and injuries than other firearms.

(“In the case of machine guns, nobody has argued, before or since, that ordinary citizens used these weapons for lawful purposes, and so they have been rightly deemed not to fall within the ambit of the Second Amendment. Had there been even a small amount of citizens
who use them for lawful purposes,then the Second Amendment might have covered them.”).

I had to stop reading his dissent as my blood pressure was rising. The argument that just because a bunch of people own them does not make them usual is irritating. The fact that how many people own a firearm is a consideration in whether it is protected by the Second Amendment is infuriating. It is quite clear that Judge King is not impartial and is willing to read, or ignore, the Constitution as he sees fit to promote his own world view.

The very sad (and scary) thing is that President Obama, with the help of Senator Reid's changing of the Senate confirmation rules, is filling the lower federal courts with many judges who agree with and act like Judge King.

[l921428x]

We should do what the LIBTARDS do. Use the courts to fuck up the other side.

Remember, the California Voters banned Same Sex Marriage (Prop 8) and a pole smoking Activist Judge threw it out. California Voters banned giving benefits to illegal immigrants (Prop 187) and the courts emasculated it. California Voters banned Affirmative Action (Prop 209) and the liberals in colleges found ways around it.

If a liberal judge can pretty much thwart the will of the people, then why not the other way around? Why can't judges force LEFT leaning state legislatures to stop fucking with the people's rights?

Yes I remember those well. Why have a vote if some judge somewhere goes "nope. I don't think so."
I always wonder why the majority of people that voted this is did not try to impeach the judges involved.