Supreme Court Will Refuse To Hear “Assault Weapons” Ban Case. Here’s Why.

Big ships having problems with menhaden
October 8, 2015
Minnesota Man Accused of Drowning Trophy Buck with Pontoon Boat
October 12, 2015

According to MSNBC, a 2013 “assault weapon” ban passed in a Chicago suburb may be taken up by the United States Supreme Court as early as tomorrow.

The U.S. Supreme Court could announce as early as Tuesday whether it will hear a challenge to a suburban Chicago law banning firearms commonly known as assault weapons.

If the court agrees to hear the case, it would cast a shadow over similar bans in seven states. But declining to take it up would boost efforts to impose such bans elsewhere, at a time of renewed interest in gun regulation after recent mass shootings.

Gun rights advocates are challenging a 2013 law passed in Highland Park, Illinois, that bans the sale, purchase, or possession of semi-automatic weapons that can hold more than 10 rounds in a single ammunition clip or magazine. In passing the law, city officials cited the 2012 shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut and a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado.

The ban also lists certain specific rifles, including those resembling the AR-15 and AK-47 assault-style firearms.

We’ll frankly be shocked if the Court takes up the case for a very simple reason: if they do hear the case they’ll be forced to admit that the semi-automatic, “miltary-style” firearms banned in Highland Park are precisely the kind of contemporary arms of military utility that the militia must have according to the Second Amendment.

The Second Amendment is not about hunting, nor target shooting.

The explicit purpose of the Second Amendment is to ensure that the pre-existing natural right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed, because if “the People” do not have access to modern firearms suitable for military service, then they cannot possible be “well-regulated” (in proper working order, or in modern English, “well-trained and equipped”) as the Founding Fathers intended and made clear not just in the wording of the Second Amendment itself, but in their speeches, letters, and other historical documents.

The “assault weapons” banned by Highland Park and targeted by President Barack Obama and other anti-gun liberals are clearly protected by the explicit intent and text of the Second Amendment.

AR-15s, in particular, are incredibly well-suited for the modern militia, as they have roughly 90% parts commonality with the U.S. military’s standard service rifles, the selective-fire M4 carbine and M16 assault rifle. These firearms use the same ammunition, magazines, cleaning supplies, and most of the same spare parts, and have a common manual of arms. Further, since there are more than 2.5 times the number of AR-15s in civilian hands than their are M4s and M16s in military hands, it is also clear that most of the deterrent threat to foreign invasion resides not in just our ability to project power overseas, but in a citizen militia that is far larger and better armed on an individual basis that the largest armies in the world, combined.

This same unorganized militia is also the reason why a corrupt federal government would fair poorly in any attempt to impose tyranny upon the citizenry of the United States.

Any court upholding an “assault weapons” ban is spitting on the Constitution of the United States.

The Supreme Court must overturn such a ban if they take up the case, and they know it… which is why we sadly suspect they will refuse to hear the case at all.

Source: BearingArms.com

Loading

Comments are closed.