Supreme Court's next big gun control case? Post-Newtown laws face new scrutiny

[4excal]

Bring on the awareness..no matter what the awareness brings...
Supreme Court's next big gun control case? Post-Newtown laws face new scrutiny

 

[kev74]

The NRA also is backing the legal effort.

“Lower courts have been making up their own rules when it comes to the Second Amendment for too long, and the Kolbe decision crossed yet another line,” Cox said in a statement.

I call BS!!! NRA doesn't do anything for anybody! Right?

 

[4excal]

I call BS!!! NRA doesn't do anything for anybody! Right?

Only @Darth knows that!

 

[Jmac00]

this needs to be put on hold for another year maybe two. Til one of the other liberal dipshits on the SCOTUS is removed

 

[Marine Cpl]

They are backing it. Not fighting it. Just like they did with our case. They backed it with 50 grand.

 

[CaseHardened]

Bring on the awareness..no matter what the awareness brings...
Supreme Court's next big gun control case? Post-Newtown laws face new scrutiny

However, four states—California, Connecticut, Maryland and New York—passed or strengthened bans on semiautomatic weapons in 2013.

And in Massachusetts our Lesbian AG BANNED AR-15's with NO LEGISLATION AT ALL !!

AG Announces Enforcement of Ban on Assault Weapons

 

[ProgSpear]

“It is unthinkable that these weapons of war, weapons that caused the carnage in Newtown and in other communities across the country, would be protected by the Second Amendment,” Frosh said in a February statement

Hyperbolic asshole. So if .GOV is going to claim they are "weapons of war", require the state to cite exactly which branch of the US military is currently using semi-automatic AR-15's in active service, or in fact when they were EVER used by the active military.

 

[4excal]

Sure don't remember writing that title LOL

 

[spat]

“It is unthinkable that these weapons of war, weapons that caused the carnage in Newtown and in other communities across the country, would be protected by the Second Amendment,” Frosh said in a February statement

Hyperbolic asshole. So if .GOV is going to claim they are "weapons of war", require the state to cite exactly which branch of the US military is currently using semi-automatic AR-15's in active service, or in fact when they were EVER used by the active military.

If they don't belong in civilian hands, you better make the cops (and your bodyguards) get rid of them first. Try it with them for a while, you don't even need to pass a law for that.

If you're not going to take them from the cops, then you implicitly admit they are not only for war.

Of course, this completely ignores the fact that the 2A (as ruled in Miller) only protects "weapons of war", so you can't claim it doesn't protect them, or it wouldn't protect anything.