Looks like SCOTUS will have to make a decision again.
A few days ago, a Virginia Fed judge ruled that AR's are NOT 'assault weapons.'
But yesterday, the Fourth Circuit ruled that they are, and that Maryland can ban them without violating the Second Amendment.
A federal appeals court has left intact Maryland’s ban on so-called assault weapons, including AR-15s.
The full U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ruled on Aug. 6 that the ban, which also covers AK-47s and Barrett .50 caliber sniper rifles, does not violate Marylanders’ rights....
The ruling claims to follow the Bruen decision of SCOTUS.
...“The assault weapons at issue fall outside the ambit of protection offered by the Second Amendment because, in essence, they are military-style weapons designed for sustained combat operations that are ill-suited and disproportionate to the need for self-defense,” U.S. Circuit Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III wrote for the majority....
Muskets were used in sustained combat ops and for self-defense. So were Colt's .45 pistols, along with any modern semi-auto rifle. The Fourth Circuit's decision rests on the girly-man "it looks really mean" implied in their "military-style" comment.
Back to SCOTUS.
The 20th-century US v. Miller SCOTUS decision, meanwhile, states that the 2A only protects weapons that are useful for militia service -- thus, the AR-15 is especially protected precisely because it is the best candidate for and would be used as the service weapon in militias if we were to need to set them up to repel an invasion.
ReplyDeleteAll three of the SCOTUS decisions on the 2A show it as the most protected weapon by their various logics: it is the most commonly-owned and lawfully used American rifle, per Heller; there is a strong tradition of its ownership and use by civilians, per Bruen; and it's the best militia rifle, per Miller.