4th Circuit Strikes down Maryland's Assault Weapon & Magazine Ban

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Abatis

Verified User
The 4th circuit court of appeals has struck down a Maryland ban of assault weapons and magazines that hold more than 10 rounds saying that the, "Maryland law implicates the core protection of the Second Amendment—'the right of law-abiding responsible citizens to use arms in defense of hearth and home,'” and that it, "is now well understood, Heller
affirmed that the Second Amendment protects a preexisting “individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation.”

The court ruled that the type of weapon banned is indisputably a type in common use, "Like a number of courts that have previously considered this question, we have little difficulty in concluding that the banned semi-automatic rifles are in common use by law-abiding citizens. " The 4th finally followed precedent and held accordingly.

The 4th remanded and sent the case back down and demanded that the 2nd Amendment should be applied using Strict Scrutiny.

The 4th's ruling seems legally ironclad and impenetrable, the dissent is laughably impotent.

This case creates conflict in the Circuits increasing the likelihood SCOTUS hear the issue; the recent denial of Cert for an assault weapon ban comes to mind.


Here is the ruling (pdf reader frame will open):

http://michellawyers.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Kolbe-v.-Hogan_Opinion.pdf

Washington Post article:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...234240-cb59-11e5-88ff-e2d1b4289c2f_story.html
 
moon2012 said:
It appears open to challenge to me. Show us the ' laughably impotent ' dissent.
Click to expand...

What do you find compelling?

The "banned" guns can not be considered dangerous and unusual so what legal foundation is there for government to claim a power to restrict their public use (restricting possession is off the table).
 
I've always found it interesting how people refer to semi-automatic weapons as "assault weapons". If we were to ban all "assault weapons" then that would pretty much mean nearly all guns, even most handguns used for self protection, with the exception of old fashioned six shooter type handguns and rifles that you load one shell at a time. The word "assault" is more of a fear word than the true reality in my opinion.
 
Cowgirl Tuff said:
I've always found it interesting how people refer to semi-automatic weapons as "assault weapons". If we were to ban all "assault weapons" then that would pretty much mean nearly all guns, even most handguns used for self protection, with the exception of old fashioned six shooter type handguns and rifles that you load one shell at a time. The word "assault" is more of a fear word than the true reality in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Well, have you considered the response if you ordered a whole bunch of Marines to assault an enemy redoubt with hand-guns ? I'm pretty sure they'd politely ask for assault weapons instead.
 
moon2012 said:
Well, have you considered the response if you ordered a whole bunch of Marines to assault an enemy redoubt with hand-guns ? I'm pretty sure they'd politely ask for assault weapons instead.
Click to expand...

They would use weapons meant for the type of combat they were going into. I don't think many people are talking about banning weapons for military use.
 
Cowgirl Tuff said:
They would use weapons meant for the type of combat they were going into. I don't think many people are talking about banning weapons for military use.
Click to expand...

I see. I thought you were saying that the public should be permitted to have the same weapons as the military. My bad.
 
moon2012 said:
I see. I thought you were saying that the public should be permitted to have the same weapons as the military. My bad.
Click to expand...

I'm ok with Americans being able to buy military type guns if they can afford it and handle them responsibly
 
Cowgirl Tuff said:
I've always found it interesting how people refer to semi-automatic weapons as "assault weapons". If we were to ban all "assault weapons" then that would pretty much mean nearly all guns, even most handguns used for self protection, with the exception of old fashioned six shooter type handguns and rifles that you load one shell at a time. The word "assault" is more of a fear word than the true reality in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Norah.....I have to say that personally I have no objection to your posts, but explain to me that all week the advertising bot has been trying to sell me clothes to wear when I ride my horses........have you been posting too much?......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
Norah.....I have to say that personally I have no objection to your posts, but explain to me that all week the advertising bot has been trying to sell me clothes to wear when I ride my horses........have you been posting too much?......
Click to expand...

Lol I don't know but that's pretty awesome! Have you been shopping online for western wear or riding clothes?
 
Cowgirl Tuff said:
It's not really a question of need in my opinion. If someone wants one for sport or for home defense or hunting or just to collect it's completely up to them.
Click to expand...

Well, it shouldn't be, imo. Such weapons represent a threat to the public on the scale of severe. Do you think that the public should also have a choice regarding anti-personnel mines ? You know, for hunting deer without actually being there ?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top