Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Latest "assault weapons" ban ruling

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Latest "assault weapons" ban ruling

    Federal judge upholds Massachusetts "assault weapons" ban.
    What does he mean by, "in the absence of federal legislation"?

    “The AR-15 and its analogs, along with large capacity magazines, are simply not weapons within the original meaning of the individual constitutional right to ‘bear Arms,’ ” Young wrote in a 47-page ruling. “In the absence of federal legislation, Massachusetts is free to ban these weapons and large-capacity magazines. Other states are equally free to leave them unregulated and available to their law-abiding citizens. These policy matters are simply not of constitutional moment.”



    Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

    #2
    So now what? They start going door to door taking the weapons?

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by drop dead fred View Post
      So now what? They start going door to door taking the weapons?


      Essentially yes, they will impose some kind of buy back plan I’m sure failing your voluntary sell back they will then make it a crime to own one.



      Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

      Comment


        #4
        Ironic this is in Massachusetts

        Comment


          #5
          There will be an appeal

          Comment


            #6
            “Young also rejected attempts by the gun-rights group to challenge the ban on the grounds that AR-15s are extremely popular in the U.S.

            "The AR-15’s present day popularity is not constitutionally material," Young said. "This is because the words of our Constitution are not mutable. They mean the same today as they did 227 years ago when the Second Amendment was adopted."

            Oh the irony......yes, the words mean the same as they did 227 years ago: SHALL NOT BE INFINGED. Idiot liberals.

            Comment


              #7
              really odd tactic...saying the constitution is outdated and wrongly interpreted then using the constitution to justify his position on a retort...

              this guys a judge people....a judge..

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by Daniel75 View Post
                “Young also rejected attempts by the gun-rights group to challenge the ban on the grounds that AR-15s are extremely popular in the U.S.

                "The AR-15’s present day popularity is not constitutionally material," Young said. "This is because the words of our Constitution are not mutable. They mean the same today as they did 227 years ago when the Second Amendment was adopted."

                Oh the irony......yes, the words mean the same as they did 227 years ago: SHALL NOT BE INFINGED. Idiot liberals.


                Beat me to it! He just infringed.

                Comment


                  #9
                  District Judge on constitutional law. Dont even consider it a real decision. Long way to go before thats decided. Oh wait. The SCOTUS already decided that one a long time ago. Do not pass go. Do not collect 200 dollars. These activists judges should be sanctioned.


                  Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by J Sweet View Post
                    District Judge on constitutional law. Dont even consider it a real decision. Long way to go before thats decided. Oh wait. The SCOTUS already decided that one a long time ago. Do not pass go. Do not collect 200 dollars. These activists judges should be sanctioned.


                    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
                    you misspelled 'remove from the bench'.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      I think this bears repeating. V O T E. Get your friends to do it. Get your relatives to do it. Get your neighbors to do it. The left has a head of steam right now and they will roll right over us if we don't!!

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by ACCURACYINC View Post
                        I think this bears repeating. V O T E. Get your friends to do it. Get your relatives to do it. Get your neighbors to do it. The left has a head of steam right now and they will roll right over us if we don't!!
                        x2!

                        But no one will ever take my guns. I can assure you of that

                        Comment


                          #13
                          I suppose using that rationale first amendment rights are not extended to electronic medium since the original framers wouldnt have known the future of electronic communications like email, computers etc.


                          Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by systemnt View Post
                            you misspelled 'remove from the bench'.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by gingib View Post
                              x2!

                              But no one will ever take my guns. I can assure you of that
                              You will put your family in harm's way for a gunfight with feds? I always wonder how this would work. See David Koresh.

                              Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X