On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 4:25 PM, Will Brink <w...@brinkzone.com> wrote:
> From the Slate article: > > "The state recognized that the Supreme Court’s decision in D.C. v. Heller > protects citizens’ right to keep handguns in the home. > But it argued that > the firearms it had proscribed constituted “dangerous and unusual > weapons,” which the Heller court said could be outlawed. Indeed, Maryland > pointed out, the Heller court explicitly declares that especially > dangerous weapons “that are most useful in military service—M-16 rifles > and the like—may be banned.” > Does the AR-15 fall into this category? M16 rifles are partially banned since, as "machineguns", they are both subject to the NFA of 1934 and any manufactured after 1986 are really banned (for non-gov't ownership.) Also, they are clearly "useful in military service". The AR-15 is *not* a "machinegun", and I'm not aware that it has been used in the US military service or in any other military service. But it does *look* a lot like the M16.d The AK-47 as generally found in the US also is not a "machinegun" and again I'm not aware of any military use. What is confusing is that the *military* (machinegun) version has the same name, in addition to them looking alike. Are semi-automatic rifles that look like military weapons "dangerous and unusual"? It appears that there are over 2 1/2 million (maybe 4 million) AR-15 rifles owned by people in the USA( http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/2012/12/20/assault_rifle_stats_how_many_assault_rifles_are_there_in_america.html) I cant find the US ownership number for the AK-47, but I'll guess a larger number because it is a less expensive gun and generally considered less desirable. Add in other semi-automatic rifles with replaceable magazines - and we're likely well over 5 million - maybe approaching 10 million. Does the "unusual" label fit? What about "dangerous"? Semi-automatic firearms have been available commercially for well over a century - Colt started production of the Browning semi-auto pistol in 1900, and the famous 1911 Colt dates back to 1911 (and there was an earlier version.) Semi-auto rifles may have lagged a bit in production, but the M1 Garand dating to the 1920's was heavily used in WWII and later - and is considerably more powerful than either the Ar-15 or AK-47, and are a large variety of hunting rifles. All firearms are "dangerous", but perhaps they need to be especially dangerous to be banned? Looking through District of Columbia v Heller I see wording like,"in cases where a governmental body has deemed a particular type of weapon especially dangerous." and "highly dangerous". So - we come to "dangerous *and* unusual" [emphasis added] It seems hard to me to put For a more thorough treatment see http://www.progunleaders.org/Dangerous%20and%20Unusual/ > What strikes me as bizzar is, it was not long ago that the focus on gun > control was on handguns. Handguncontrol et al, argued that handguns were > involved in most firearms murders, were easy to conceal, 2A only applied > to rifles, etc, etc. Now, it's a 180 focus being they lost that battle and > now "only want to rid us of those evil black rifles made for war" and all > that. > > The irony of that 180 should not be lost. > Yes. :-) --henry schaffer > > > Aaron Clements wrote: > > This isn't the first case to so hold. Judge Easterbrook's opinion in > > Highland Park from the 7th Circuit did likewise, though Easterbrook went > > to great lengths to apply tests that violate explicit language of both > > Heller and McDonald ... and the SCOTUS refused to grant cert, resulting > > in Thomas's dissent opining that the 7th had "relegat[ed] the Second > > Amendment to a second-class right." > > > > > > Truly, I don't know what the suit proponents expected by bringing suit at > > the present time in a circuit composed of ten Democrats and five > > Republicans (by original appointing President). One of the four Clinton > > appointees abandoned the ideological ship and authored the dissent joined > > by three Bush '41/'43 appointees; the lone remaining Reagan appointee > > balanced that out by joining the other three Clinton and six Obama > > appointees. > > > > > > From: Henry Schaffer <h...@ncsu.edu> > > To: firearmsregprof <firearmsregprof@lists.ucla.edu> > > Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2017 12:42 PM > > Subject: banning "assault weapons" > > > > > > http://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Published/141945A.P.pdf > > > > > > (haven't read this 116 page item yet) > > > > > > An article which called my attention to this opinion - and which loves > > it: > > > > > > http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2017/02/21/appeals_ > court_holds_sec > > ond_amendment_doesn_t_protect_assault_weapons.html > > > > --henry schaffer > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > To post, send message to Firearmsregprof@lists.ucla.edu > > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see > > http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof > > > > > > Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as > > private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are > > posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly > > or wrongly) forward the messages to others. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > To post, send message to Firearmsregprof@lists.ucla.edu > > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see > > http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof > > > > > > Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as > > private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are > > posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly > > or wrongly) forward the messages to others. > > > -- > Sincerely, > > Author and industry consultant, Will Brink @ www.BrinkZone.com > > Free articles, free ebook, and other stuff of interest to fitness > enthusiasts, see my site at: > > http://www.brinkzone.com/ > > Remember, "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from > mediocre > minds." -- Einstein > >
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to Firearmsregprof@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
