Hopefully the supreme court agrees with this judge's ruling. Semiautomatic firearms should not be undermined or banned under the guise of assault weapon bans.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/ju...nal/ar-AAKJbst



SAN DIEGO — A federal judge on Friday struck down California's ban on assault weapons as unconstitutional but left plenty of time for the state to file an appeal.



Gov. Brian Kemp gets booed during speech at Georgia state GOP…
Fauci slams 'fabricated' attacks against him

SAN DIEGO — A federal judge on Friday struck down California's ban on assault weapons as unconstitutional but left plenty of time for the state to file an appeal.

Judge Roger T. Benitez, who has favored pro-gun groups in past rulings, described the AR-15 rifle, used in many of the nation's deadliest mass shootings, as an ideal weapon.

"Like the Swiss Army Knife, the popular AR-15 rifle is a perfect combination of home defense weapon and homeland defense equipment," he wrote in Friday's decision.

"Yet, the State of California makes it a crime to have an AR15 type rifle," Benitez continued. "Therefore, this Court declares the California statutes to be unconstitutional."

He praised the AR-15 as a rifle that should be formally protected by the law for its "militia readiness."

snip..


"Government is not free to impose its own new policy choices on American citizens where Constitutional rights are concerned," the judge wrote.


https://apnews.com/article/californi...50cae41a087468



But Benitez disagreed.

“This case is not about extraordinary weapons lying at the outer limits of Second Amendment protection. The banned ‘assault weapons’ are not bazookas, howitzers, or machine guns. Those arms are dangerous and solely useful for military purposes,” his ruling said. “Instead, the firearms deemed ‘assault weapons’ are fairly ordinary, popular, modern.”

The judge said despite California’s ban, there currently are an estimated 185,569 assault weapons registered with the state.

They were grandfathered in before California’s evolving definition of an assault weapon.

“This is an average case about average guns used in average ways for average purposes,” the ruling said. “One is to be forgiven if one is persuaded by news media and others that the nation is awash with murderous AR-15 assault rifles. The facts, however, do not support this hyperbole, and facts matter.”

“In California, murder by knife occurs seven times more often than murder by rifle,” he added.

He also called the ban “a continuing failed experiment which does not achieve its objectives of preventing mass shootings or attacks on law enforcement officers.”

In a preliminary ruling in September, Benitez said California’s complicated legal definition of assault weapons can ensnare otherwise law-abiding gun owners with criminal penalties that among other things can strip them of their Second Amendment right to own firearms.

snip...

The lawsuit filed by the San Diego County Gun Owners Political Action Committee, California Gun Rights Foundation, Second Amendment Foundation and Firearms Policy Coalition is among several by gun advocacy groups challenging California’s firearms laws, which are among the strictest in the nation.

It was filed on behalf of gun owners who want to use high-capacity magazines in their legal rifles or pistols, but said they can’t because doing so would turn them into illegal assault weapons under California law. Unlike military weapons, the semi-automatic rifles fire one bullet each time the trigger is pulled, and the plaintiffs say they are legal in 41 states.

The lawsuit said California is “one of only a small handful states to ban many of the most popular semiautomatic firearms in the nation because they possess one or more common characteristics, such as pistol grips and threaded barrels,” frequently but not exclusively along with detachable ammunition magazines.

Brandon Combs, the president of the Firearms Policy Coalition, said in a statement that the ruling “held what millions of Americans already know to be true: Bans on so-called ‘assault weapons’ are unconstitutional and cannot stand.”

__________________
"There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag… We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language… and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”—Theodore Roosevelt

I think it was a misinterpreting of the constitution.

__________________
“Hate is like an acid. It damages the vessel in which it’s stored and destroys the vessels on which it’s poured.”

states should be able to offer its citizens the freedom to have these laws in place.
what is good for Rawlins may not be for Westchester.
but yeah a better written law might pass.

__________________
“Hate is like an acid. It damages the vessel in which it’s stored and destroys the vessels on which it’s poured.”

The right of the people to keep and bear arms sounds pretty clear.

__________________
"There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag… We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language… and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”—Theodore Roosevelt

Rights should not be up to the states to decide.

__________________
"There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag… We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language… and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”—Theodore Roosevelt

yeah just not tanks and nuclear war heads. If we can ban bazookas, machine guns, and land mines, we should be able to ban certain types of rifles and pistols. Just saying. I don't think we should ban all guns, but a community has a right to its own safety measures.

__________________
“Hate is like an acid. It damages the vessel in which it’s stored and destroys the vessels on which it’s poured.”

I disagree. Also, what part of "shall not be infringed" is hard to decipher?

What, in the name of Feinstein's butthole, is going to prevent a psycho from misusing even a pencil? I ask all anti-gun people, weenies included, the question.

Bazookas, machine guns, and land mines, certain rifles and pistols, or a pencil wielded by some psycho, shoved into your throat will kill you at the same level of death, no?

Read the ruling again!...

__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd

The Constitution clearly says "Shall not be infringed." It does not mention "bazookas, howitzers, or machine guns." as a limitation.

IMO anything past shall not be infringed is unconstitutional.

But I'm sure you are going to explain how it is a misinterpreting of the Constitution.

Tanks are legal to own.


. ITs a huge leap t go from nuclear war heads, Bazookas and land minds to semiautomatic firearms.

If those so called safety measures infringe on the 2nd amendment or any other rights then no it doesn't have a right to those so called safety measures. The whole entire point of the bill of rights is that it is something the government can not restrict because government is a untrustworthy entity and necessary evil.

__________________
"There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag… We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language… and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”—Theodore Roosevelt