Supreme Court says Second Amendment guarantees right to carry guns in public

Militarization of police and wide proliferation of guns including weapons of war haven't prevented or interrupted a single mass shooting.

 

Likely the opposite effect.

 

There have been about 6 pages of additional commentary since I asked the question define "assault weapons", of which I received a "Come on Man" and a "Disagree". I think it is a very important question, and one our lawmakers have clearly struggled with. "Assault weapons" basically covers every gun made in my book, so we must get more specific. If people are going to throw the term AW's around it needs to be clearly defined.

 

When 2A was written, which "arms" could you own?

Answer: all of them. Just ask John Paul Jones.

That is all.

 

What weapons of war? M203s? M240s? M79s? MA Duece? Mk 19s? MP5SDs? M60s? M4s? BARs?

 

The guy from Led Zeppelin?

 

Assault/Automatic Weapon, I.e. AK47/74, M4, G36, FMAS, SA80 holding down the trigger until magazine is empty.
Semi Auto- AR, M1A1, other modern military style replica where you have to pull the trigger for each shot.
It’s an important technical piece of info that doesn’t fit certain politicians painting everything with the bogeyman phrase assault weapon.

 

Agreed... and a pistol with a 15 round clip would constitute an assault weapon for many folks so you better be more specific.

 

One bit of positive gun new. The new compromise gun bill was attached to the dormant bill to name the federal courthouse after the great Joseph Hatchett one year after his death, after the last attempt was stopped by pure racism - Andrew Clyde of Georgia - details of the last attempt below.

Looks like it is going through now

House G.O.P., Banding Together, Kills Bid to Honor Pioneering Black Judge

 

Care to explain?

 

Politicians have no clue, especially lib politicians. That's why they and their protestors can never say what an assault weapon is when people ask them.

 

You deserved the ratings. Numerous statutes and ordinances in this country have defined what an "assault weapon" is. There are some differences among them, and if I were crafting a statute, I'd draft it a differently from how they did, but there's also a significant amount of overlap. Pretending that you can't figure out what an "assault weapon" is comes off as deliberate ignorance.

 

Seriously, the guy is mad that people won't answer his question when a simple google search would have saved him the effort of asking the question in the first place.

 

Too be fair this all centers on AR15s. Dems started off several years ago calling them Assault Rifles. Some even claimed that AR stood for Assault RifleWhen it was pointed out that was not what AR15s where nor what AR stood for they pivoted to Assault WEAPONS… a term with no concrete definition as we see here in this thread. Technically wouldn’t any weapon used in an a assault be an assault weapon? A knife. A bat. A colt .45 peacemaker?

Now the term favored by democrats is Weapons of War… again a nebulous term not easily defined. Shotguns are used by our soldiers, 9mm pistols, knives, etc… Hell some the older sniper rifles where just high powered hunting rifle variants.

Biden himself lumped 9mm pistols in with high powered assault weapons. And these are the people wanting to make sweeping policy changes..

So for a poster to ask for an actual concrete definition from other posters using these terms seems fair. Hard to debate if one side doesn’t know the definition of the terms they are debating… which is one reasons the left uses such terms as weapons of war and assault weapons. The other is to stir up emotions in their base.

 

The Supreme Court’s Faux ‘Originalism’

 

Hey, I call it an assault rifle and I have a significant amount of love hate with one.

Now the weapons of war thing… that phrase should be defunded.

 

The Court GVR’d (grant, vacate, remand - essentially telling the lower court to decide it again while considering the new precedent) a whole bunch of gun cases today.

The ones that got kicked back to the circuit courts for reconsideration in light of Bruen include challenges to California and New Jersey’s magazine capacity bans, Maryland’s assault weapons ban, and a Hawaii carry law fairly similar to the one in New York that got struck down.

Court is basically telling the appellate courts that they previously applied two-step scrutiny that Bruen has now clarified is not the applicable test and the appellate courts should consider them again using the correct test.

 

Rifle
Capable of more than 15 rounds

I have three. They are useless to my home defense. They are locked away and not accessible to me in any meaningful sense. For The Invasion, of course.

.357 mag is loaded and accessible but hidden, Mossberg 500 is also loaded and quasi-hidden. I don’t have kids, and I “stash” it with visitors.

My SKS is essentially meaningless unless I wanted to unleash my fury on the world.

 

What is the importance of labeling these things correctly? I don't care what they are called. And to suggest that the labels are only coming from Dems is hogwash. People whose children where killed do not advocate for gun control based upon political affiliation.

 

My guess is you know there is a big difference between
John owns an AR15
John owns an Assault Rifle
John owns weapons of war