Fridayās appeals court ruling in the New Jersey case goes further than a July 2024 ruling from a federal judge, who said that the stateās ban on AR-15s specifically was unconstitutional but upheld the provision barring larger magazines.
The third US circuit court of appeals said on Friday in its opinion that the stateās ban on all semiautomatic rifles it deems to be āassault firearmsā and its restriction on ālarge capacity ammunition magazinesā were unconstitutional.
New Jerseyās attorney general, Jennifer Davenport, a Democrat whose office defended the law, told the Associated Press that the decision is āas unfortunate as it is legally incorrectā.
āGotta maximize the body count of school childrenā
-These judges, probably
I donāt care what you call it. The semantics donāt matter to me. We can do it in any terms you like.
But if you ban gun A because itās weapon of war, but allow gun B to be sold because itās a hunting tool, when both are semi-automaitc guns shooting the same bullet out of clips, then your ban accomplished nothing of substance and wonāt be around long.
But all that matters is people donāt have that one specific kind of gun, right?
Iām not even arguing the usefulness of bans here, just that the people trying to enact them write them in a way that undermines their purpose and leads to a defeat in the courts. You want to ban assault rifles? Write better legislation.
quack quack quack quack. we had an assault weapons ban in the 90s and when they let it expire, the number of mass shootings skyrocketed and it became the number one choice for kid murder. you can piss and moan about how āan m16 is a classic american rifleā and mewl about magazines, and entirely ignore the actual history.
until we dx citizenās united, itās a rather pointless exercise as the NRA is willing to spend so much russian money in our elections.
nah. we just need a court that understands the full fucking text of the 2a instead of a portion.
Lol
At what point in this conversation have I ever pissed and moaned about the M-16 being a classic American rifle or complained about magazine capacity? At what point did I ever deny or disparage the effectiveness of the 90ās Federal ban?
And youāll get that court about the time you get rid of Citizenās United. But why not at least encourage lawmakers to get rid of the low hanging fruit that gives them an easy excuse to strike new gun laws down and force the lobbyists to spend more of that money to defeat it?
Or you can blame people for pointing out obvious flaws in these policies and accuse those people of arguing for standpoints theyāve never heldā¦
Take whatever approach you think is most effective.