'Holy shit!' cherry on top.
Two things: first, that portion is the bit that some CAfornicated Rep. put into the bill that said 'Any automatic weapon that wasn't at some point owned by a plain citizen before this date can never be owned by a plain citizen.'A Kansas US District Court judge has tossed an illegal machine gun possession charge on Second Amendment grounds. The court found that machine guns in question are clearly “bearable arms,” and in this case at least, the government failed to show a historical tradition to justify their ban.
The court finds that the Second Amendment applies to the weapons charged because they are “bearable arms” within the original meaning of the amendment. The court further finds that the government has failed to establish that this nation’s tradition of gun regulation justifies the application of 18 USC § 922(0) to Defendant.
That’s the portion of the 1986 Firearm Owners Protection Act that outlaws civilian possession of machine guns.
Second, Oh yeah, I'm sure the .gov will appeal. And I cannot imagine why they, as noted, 'barely tried to meet that burden'; they had to know that if the judge ruled against them it would mean they'd have to appeal, and it would be that much harder, I'd think, to try to prove 'that this nation’s tradition of gun regulation justifies the application of 18 USC § 922(0) to Defendant'.
Just throwing spitballs, maybe the people involved looked at the Bruen and Rahimi rulings and decided "We're screwed on this". Or maybe they, for some reason, wanted to hurry it to the 10th Circuit Appeals, or... Beats me.
5 comments:
I don't see any way that SCOTUS is going to overturn the machine gun ban. Too many on the court even on the conservative side, are political and make their decisions based on politics rather than the law.
I don't know anything about this ruling, but it wouldn't surprise me if they ruled that way specifically to get this case to go to the Supreme Court so they can come up with another convoluted ruling to uphold the ban that will give the lower courts more latitude to rule that other anti-gun provisions are "constitutional".
If they wanted to uphold the ban, they only needed to invoke the "in common use" canard from the Heller ruling. Machine guns aren't in common use so they can be banned according to that decision. But that isn't the question that was raised, so that's not what's going to come before SCOTUS when this is appealed. They're going to have to come up with some new and improved interpretation of "tradition of gun regulation" that's going to open the door to any number of other gun control measures.
Admittedly, I'm pretty cynical about this stuff, and SCOTUS has surprised me with a few rulings lately, but I just don't see them overturning the machine gun ban.
I'll take it as a "victory".
Overturn the NFA?
What other enumerated Constitutional right requires a tax to exercise it?
I'm not too excited; it's only a district court decision, and it's a long way to a SCOTUS decision.
But yeah; Preliminary Injunction pending appeal, appeal to the Circuit, if .gov gets an unfavorable ruling, request en banc panel, and delay, delay, delay at each step.
Well, since no one on the left can parse out the difference between semi-automatic and full automatic we might get a "common use" consideration anyway.
“Admittedly, I'm pretty cynical about this stuff”
With good reason. I don’t see any way that the 10th will rule that way.
It would basically be saying “Every gun law is an infringement according to the 2A” which would be correct but they aren’t going to go there in our lifetimes.
Post a Comment