‘A federal judge ruled a Massachusetts ban on assault weapons is consistent with a recent landmark Supreme Court decision that established firearms regulations must be consistent with the nation’s “historical tradition.”
“The relevant history affirms the principle that in 1791, as now, there was a tradition of regulating ‘dangerous and unusual’ weapons – specifically, those that are not reasonably necessary for self-defense,” U.S. District Chief Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV wrote in an order Thursday.
The assault weapons prohibited by the Massachusetts ban are “not suitable for ordinary self-defense purposes, and pose substantial dangers far beyond those inherent in the design of ordinary firearms,” the judge wrote. The Massachusetts law prohibits some semiautomatic weapons and large-capacity magazines. It was passed in 1998 and was made permanent after a similar federal statute expired in 2004, according to the judge’s order.’
“…not suitable for ordinary self-defense purposes…”
True.
And the decision recognizes
Bruen and is consistent with current Second Amendment jurisprudence.
For those who disagree with the ruling, Judge Saylor isn’t the villain – that would be Thomas and his ‘historical tradition’ test; a ‘test’ that’s flawed, ham-handed, and poorly reasoned.