Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: jstaff
The DC Circuit, when it decided Heller II, held the opposite.

Heller v. District of Columbia, No. 10-7036 (2011)

We hold the District had the authority under D.C. law to promulgate the challenged gun laws, and we uphold as constitutional the prohibitions of assault weapons and of large-capacity magazines (>10) and some of the registration requirements. ...

Heller suggests "M-16 rifles and the like" may be banned because they are "dangerous and unusual," see 554 U.S. at 627. The Court had previously described the "AR-15" as "the civilian version of the military's M-16 rifle." Staples v. United States, 511 U.S. 600, 603 (1994). Although semi- automatic firearms, unlike automatic M-16s, fire "only one shot with each pull of the trigger," id. at 602 n.1, semi-automatics still fire almost as rapidly as automatics.

If you are looking to find the federal courts consistent when it comes to the RKBA, the only consistency you will find is that they are intellectually dishonest, and they do not abide by precedent that does not suit their predetermined agenda.

There is plenty to "not like" in the DC Circuit opinion. I haven't heard of a petition to SCOTUS hearing the case, but assume one was filed, and the petition was denied. IOW, what the DC ciruit said in 2011 is the law.

Not that I have any resepect for the law, but it is what it is.

5 posted on 01/22/2013 9:45:53 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Cboldt
How different things would be if Jack Miller had appeared before SCOTUS in May of 1939.
7 posted on 01/22/2013 11:04:28 AM PST by MileHi ( "It's coming down to patriots vs the politicians." - ovrtaxt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson