US Appeals court upholds Marylands unconstitutional ban on scary guns

[TNHarley]

U.S. appeals court upholds Maryland's ban on assault rifles
A federal appeals court on Tuesday upheld Maryland's ban on assault rifles, ruling gun owners are not protected under the U.S. Constitution to possess "weapons of war," court documents showed.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit decided 10-4 that the Firearm Safety Act of 2013, a law in response to the massacre in Newtown, Connecticut, by a gunman with an assault rifle, does not violate the right to bear arms within the Second Amendment.
"Put simply, we have no power to extend Second Amendment protection to the weapons of war," Judge Robert King wrote

---------
Extend it? WTF is that supposed to mean?
I assume, for the sake of consistency and honor, those same people also don't think the first applies to the internet and phones? You know, because they cant "extend it?"
Or maybe any religion developed after 1787, doesn't get the same rights as one developed pre-Constitution?
IDK maybe that's not what it means

 

[owebo]

Yep....Naziland....

Now onto the new conservative SCOTUS......

 

[martybegan]

U.S. appeals court upholds Maryland's ban on assault rifles
A federal appeals court on Tuesday upheld Maryland's ban on assault rifles, ruling gun owners are not protected under the U.S. Constitution to possess "weapons of war," court documents showed.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit decided 10-4 that the Firearm Safety Act of 2013, a law in response to the massacre in Newtown, Connecticut, by a gunman with an assault rifle, does not violate the right to bear arms within the Second Amendment.
"Put simply, we have no power to extend Second Amendment protection to the weapons of war," Judge Robert King wrote

---------
Extend it? WTF is that supposed to mean?
I assume, for the sake of consistency and honor, those same people also don't think the first applies to the internet and phones? You know, because they cant "extend it?"
Or maybe any religion developed after 1787, doesn't get the same rights as one developed pre-Constitution?
IDK maybe that's not what it means

When courts get to ignore the obvious, it is a threat to all of us. Progressives don't see that, because they would rather use the judicial "Easy Button" than the harder amendment process.

 

[owebo]

U.S. appeals court upholds Maryland's ban on assault rifles
A federal appeals court on Tuesday upheld Maryland's ban on assault rifles, ruling gun owners are not protected under the U.S. Constitution to possess "weapons of war," court documents showed.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit decided 10-4 that the Firearm Safety Act of 2013, a law in response to the massacre in Newtown, Connecticut, by a gunman with an assault rifle, does not violate the right to bear arms within the Second Amendment.
"Put simply, we have no power to extend Second Amendment protection to the weapons of war," Judge Robert King wrote

---------
Extend it? WTF is that supposed to mean?
I assume, for the sake of consistency and honor, those same people also don't think the first applies to the internet and phones? You know, because they cant "extend it?"
Or maybe any religion developed after 1787, doesn't get the same rights as one developed pre-Constitution?
IDK maybe that's not what it means

When courts get to ignore the obvious, it is a threat to all of us. Progressives don't see that, because they would rather use the judicial "Easy Button" than the harder amendment process.

Very true. The silver lining to this oppression is that once at the SCOTUS, it has the potential to bring down the national firearms act and all its fascist derivatives....

 

[TNHarley]

U.S. appeals court upholds Maryland's ban on assault rifles
A federal appeals court on Tuesday upheld Maryland's ban on assault rifles, ruling gun owners are not protected under the U.S. Constitution to possess "weapons of war," court documents showed.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit decided 10-4 that the Firearm Safety Act of 2013, a law in response to the massacre in Newtown, Connecticut, by a gunman with an assault rifle, does not violate the right to bear arms within the Second Amendment.
"Put simply, we have no power to extend Second Amendment protection to the weapons of war," Judge Robert King wrote

---------
Extend it? WTF is that supposed to mean?
I assume, for the sake of consistency and honor, those same people also don't think the first applies to the internet and phones? You know, because they cant "extend it?"
Or maybe any religion developed after 1787, doesn't get the same rights as one developed pre-Constitution?
IDK maybe that's not what it means

When courts get to ignore the obvious, it is a threat to all of us. Progressives don't see that, because they would rather use the judicial "Easy Button" than the harder amendment process.

Very true. The silver lining to this oppression is that once at the SCOTUS, it has the potential to bring down the national firearms act and all its fascist derivatives....

yes, hopefully they might start actually hearing this shit. There are 7 or 8 states that have similar infringements of liberty in place. Hopefully they all cease to exist.

 

[martybegan]

U.S. appeals court upholds Maryland's ban on assault rifles
A federal appeals court on Tuesday upheld Maryland's ban on assault rifles, ruling gun owners are not protected under the U.S. Constitution to possess "weapons of war," court documents showed.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit decided 10-4 that the Firearm Safety Act of 2013, a law in response to the massacre in Newtown, Connecticut, by a gunman with an assault rifle, does not violate the right to bear arms within the Second Amendment.
"Put simply, we have no power to extend Second Amendment protection to the weapons of war," Judge Robert King wrote

---------
Extend it? WTF is that supposed to mean?
I assume, for the sake of consistency and honor, those same people also don't think the first applies to the internet and phones? You know, because they cant "extend it?"
Or maybe any religion developed after 1787, doesn't get the same rights as one developed pre-Constitution?
IDK maybe that's not what it means

When courts get to ignore the obvious, it is a threat to all of us. Progressives don't see that, because they would rather use the judicial "Easy Button" than the harder amendment process.

Very true. The silver lining to this oppression is that once at the SCOTUS, it has the potential to bring down the national firearms act and all its fascist derivatives....

yes, hopefully they might start actually hearing this shit. There are 7 or 8 states that have similar infringements of liberty in place. Hopefully they all cease to exist.

Sooner or later they will get down to striking down the Sullivan Act in NYC, the one that makes me wait 6 months and pay $1000 or so in fees just to get a revolver to keep in my apartment.

 

[TNHarley]

U.S. appeals court upholds Maryland's ban on assault rifles
A federal appeals court on Tuesday upheld Maryland's ban on assault rifles, ruling gun owners are not protected under the U.S. Constitution to possess "weapons of war," court documents showed.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit decided 10-4 that the Firearm Safety Act of 2013, a law in response to the massacre in Newtown, Connecticut, by a gunman with an assault rifle, does not violate the right to bear arms within the Second Amendment.
"Put simply, we have no power to extend Second Amendment protection to the weapons of war," Judge Robert King wrote

---------
Extend it? WTF is that supposed to mean?
I assume, for the sake of consistency and honor, those same people also don't think the first applies to the internet and phones? You know, because they cant "extend it?"
Or maybe any religion developed after 1787, doesn't get the same rights as one developed pre-Constitution?
IDK maybe that's not what it means

When courts get to ignore the obvious, it is a threat to all of us. Progressives don't see that, because they would rather use the judicial "Easy Button" than the harder amendment process.

Very true. The silver lining to this oppression is that once at the SCOTUS, it has the potential to bring down the national firearms act and all its fascist derivatives....

yes, hopefully they might start actually hearing this shit. There are 7 or 8 states that have similar infringements of liberty in place. Hopefully they all cease to exist.

Sooner or later they will get down to striking down the Sullivan Act in NYC, the one that makes me wait 6 months and pay $1000 or so in fees just to get a revolver to keep in my apartment.

I hope so! They only do that shit to curb purchase. Fucking fascists.

 

[martybegan]

U.S. appeals court upholds Maryland's ban on assault rifles
A federal appeals court on Tuesday upheld Maryland's ban on assault rifles, ruling gun owners are not protected under the U.S. Constitution to possess "weapons of war," court documents showed.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit decided 10-4 that the Firearm Safety Act of 2013, a law in response to the massacre in Newtown, Connecticut, by a gunman with an assault rifle, does not violate the right to bear arms within the Second Amendment.
"Put simply, we have no power to extend Second Amendment protection to the weapons of war," Judge Robert King wrote

---------
Extend it? WTF is that supposed to mean?
I assume, for the sake of consistency and honor, those same people also don't think the first applies to the internet and phones? You know, because they cant "extend it?"
Or maybe any religion developed after 1787, doesn't get the same rights as one developed pre-Constitution?
IDK maybe that's not what it means

When courts get to ignore the obvious, it is a threat to all of us. Progressives don't see that, because they would rather use the judicial "Easy Button" than the harder amendment process.

Very true. The silver lining to this oppression is that once at the SCOTUS, it has the potential to bring down the national firearms act and all its fascist derivatives....

yes, hopefully they might start actually hearing this shit. There are 7 or 8 states that have similar infringements of liberty in place. Hopefully they all cease to exist.

Sooner or later they will get down to striking down the Sullivan Act in NYC, the one that makes me wait 6 months and pay $1000 or so in fees just to get a revolver to keep in my apartment.

I hope so! They only do that shit to curb purchase. Fucking fascists.

What I want to see is Sotomeyer or Kagan (forgot who wrote the opinion part) justify that law, when she (I believe) was the one that commented on that Texas Abortion law requiring in-patient level care. Her words were something along the line of "if its just there to make something harder, it is infringing" or something like that.

 

[dcbl]

I heard about that yesterday - we are losing our identity as Americans

The big question is, can Trump seat enough reasonable judges in 8 years to reverse the negative trends in our Judicial Branch?

I am not sure, but I hope so, we need to get Neil Gorsuch seated on SCOTUS yesterday...

 

[OldLady]

There are restrictions on all rights, including the 2nd and the 1st. When we've got officially declared war on the streets of Maryland, I'd be willing to rethink this ruling.

 

[OldLady]

U.S. appeals court upholds Maryland's ban on assault rifles
A federal appeals court on Tuesday upheld Maryland's ban on assault rifles, ruling gun owners are not protected under the U.S. Constitution to possess "weapons of war," court documents showed.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit decided 10-4 that the Firearm Safety Act of 2013, a law in response to the massacre in Newtown, Connecticut, by a gunman with an assault rifle, does not violate the right to bear arms within the Second Amendment.
"Put simply, we have no power to extend Second Amendment protection to the weapons of war," Judge Robert King wrote

---------
Extend it? WTF is that supposed to mean?
I assume, for the sake of consistency and honor, those same people also don't think the first applies to the internet and phones? You know, because they cant "extend it?"
Or maybe any religion developed after 1787, doesn't get the same rights as one developed pre-Constitution?
IDK maybe that's not what it means

When courts get to ignore the obvious, it is a threat to all of us. Progressives don't see that, because they would rather use the judicial "Easy Button" than the harder amendment process.

Very true. The silver lining to this oppression is that once at the SCOTUS, it has the potential to bring down the national firearms act and all its fascist derivatives....

yes, hopefully they might start actually hearing this shit. There are 7 or 8 states that have similar infringements of liberty in place. Hopefully they all cease to exist.

Sooner or later they will get down to striking down the Sullivan Act in NYC, the one that makes me wait 6 months and pay $1000 or so in fees just to get a revolver to keep in my apartment.

I hope so! They only do that shit to curb purchase. Fucking fascists.

Yeah, the fucking fascists. Might have something to do with NYC's lower gun murder rate these days, too.

 

[dcbl]

There are restrictions on all rights, including the 2nd and the 1st. When we've got officially declared war on the streets of Maryland, I'd be willing to rethink this ruling.

by then it will be too late

the 2nd amendment was put into place so that citizens could check the power of the federal government; this ruling flies in the face of that intent

 

[danielpalos]

U.S. appeals court upholds Maryland's ban on assault rifles
A federal appeals court on Tuesday upheld Maryland's ban on assault rifles, ruling gun owners are not protected under the U.S. Constitution to possess "weapons of war," court documents showed.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit decided 10-4 that the Firearm Safety Act of 2013, a law in response to the massacre in Newtown, Connecticut, by a gunman with an assault rifle, does not violate the right to bear arms within the Second Amendment.
"Put simply, we have no power to extend Second Amendment protection to the weapons of war," Judge Robert King wrote

---------
Extend it? WTF is that supposed to mean?
I assume, for the sake of consistency and honor, those same people also don't think the first applies to the internet and phones? You know, because they cant "extend it?"
Or maybe any religion developed after 1787, doesn't get the same rights as one developed pre-Constitution?
IDK maybe that's not what it means

Seems like our legislators merely need to come up with a fixed Standard for Arms, for the unorganized militia.

 

[owebo]

U.S. appeals court upholds Maryland's ban on assault rifles
A federal appeals court on Tuesday upheld Maryland's ban on assault rifles, ruling gun owners are not protected under the U.S. Constitution to possess "weapons of war," court documents showed.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit decided 10-4 that the Firearm Safety Act of 2013, a law in response to the massacre in Newtown, Connecticut, by a gunman with an assault rifle, does not violate the right to bear arms within the Second Amendment.
"Put simply, we have no power to extend Second Amendment protection to the weapons of war," Judge Robert King wrote

---------
Extend it? WTF is that supposed to mean?
I assume, for the sake of consistency and honor, those same people also don't think the first applies to the internet and phones? You know, because they cant "extend it?"
Or maybe any religion developed after 1787, doesn't get the same rights as one developed pre-Constitution?
IDK maybe that's not what it means

Seems like our legislators merely need to come up with a fixed Standard for Arms, for the unorganized militia.

Like shall not infringe?

 

[TNHarley]

There are restrictions on all rights, including the 2nd and the 1st. When we've got officially declared war on the streets of Maryland, I'd be willing to rethink this ruling.

It wont matter because there will be no guns available. Completely redundant.

 

[martybegan]

When courts get to ignore the obvious, it is a threat to all of us. Progressives don't see that, because they would rather use the judicial "Easy Button" than the harder amendment process.

Very true. The silver lining to this oppression is that once at the SCOTUS, it has the potential to bring down the national firearms act and all its fascist derivatives....

yes, hopefully they might start actually hearing this shit. There are 7 or 8 states that have similar infringements of liberty in place. Hopefully they all cease to exist.

Sooner or later they will get down to striking down the Sullivan Act in NYC, the one that makes me wait 6 months and pay $1000 or so in fees just to get a revolver to keep in my apartment.

I hope so! They only do that shit to curb purchase. Fucking fascists.

Yeah, the fucking fascists. Might have something to do with NYC's lower gun murder rate these days, too.

The law was in place during the 70's as well. It's not new. Correlation does not equal causation.

Those low rates came from aggressive policing, and there are still plenty of guns on the Street.

 

[TNHarley]

When courts get to ignore the obvious, it is a threat to all of us. Progressives don't see that, because they would rather use the judicial "Easy Button" than the harder amendment process.

Very true. The silver lining to this oppression is that once at the SCOTUS, it has the potential to bring down the national firearms act and all its fascist derivatives....

yes, hopefully they might start actually hearing this shit. There are 7 or 8 states that have similar infringements of liberty in place. Hopefully they all cease to exist.

Sooner or later they will get down to striking down the Sullivan Act in NYC, the one that makes me wait 6 months and pay $1000 or so in fees just to get a revolver to keep in my apartment.

I hope so! They only do that shit to curb purchase. Fucking fascists.

Yeah, the fucking fascists. Might have something to do with NYC's lower gun murder rate these days, too.

actually, the Sullivan act was started in the early 20th century. Upon passage, murders ROSE 20% or so.
0-2 on this thread my love

 

[TNHarley]

U.S. appeals court upholds Maryland's ban on assault rifles
A federal appeals court on Tuesday upheld Maryland's ban on assault rifles, ruling gun owners are not protected under the U.S. Constitution to possess "weapons of war," court documents showed.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit decided 10-4 that the Firearm Safety Act of 2013, a law in response to the massacre in Newtown, Connecticut, by a gunman with an assault rifle, does not violate the right to bear arms within the Second Amendment.
"Put simply, we have no power to extend Second Amendment protection to the weapons of war," Judge Robert King wrote

---------
Extend it? WTF is that supposed to mean?
I assume, for the sake of consistency and honor, those same people also don't think the first applies to the internet and phones? You know, because they cant "extend it?"
Or maybe any religion developed after 1787, doesn't get the same rights as one developed pre-Constitution?
IDK maybe that's not what it means

Seems like our legislators merely need to come up with a fixed Standard for Arms, for the unorganized militia.

"fixed?" Lol

 

[Damaged Eagle]

There are restrictions on all rights, including the 2nd and the 1st. When we've got officially declared war on the streets of Maryland, I'd be willing to rethink this ruling.

Then all law enforcement agencies at the local, state, and federal, levels need to comply to the law as set forth by the courts ruling.

*****CHUCKLE*****

 

[OldLady]

There are restrictions on all rights, including the 2nd and the 1st. When we've got officially declared war on the streets of Maryland, I'd be willing to rethink this ruling.

by then it will be too late

the 2nd amendment was put into place so that citizens could check the power of the federal government; this ruling flies in the face of that intent

If you think you're going to stand up to the power of the federal government with an assault rifle (I'm guessing they mean AR-15 types? semi's actually?), I pity you.