From the article itself: "A federal appeals court upheld Maryland's ban on assault rifles, concluding that the powerful military-style guns outlawed by the measure are not entitled to protection under the Second Amendment"
With some pretty convoluted logic. Essentially, they said that since you can own some other kind of gun, it is ok to ban some guns. This makes just as much sense as banning the practice of a certain religion and saying you can just practice some other one or banning a group of books and saying there are others you can read. I hope the Supreme Court overturns this ASAP.
Unlikely that SCOTUS reverses this case for a couple of reasons:
1) The 4th Circuit is among the most conservative Circuits and this was an en banc decision (a decision by all of the judges of the 4th Circuit).
2) The decision is consistent with DC v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago.
3) Justice Scalia, who wrote the decision in Heller, held that while the 2d Amendment requires states to allow individuals to have firearms for self defense, states can regulate which firearms individuals individuals have access to. States can prohibit certain firearms (however, not handguns).
4) The decision by the 4th Circuit essentially follows Scalia's logic in Heller, which means that to reverse this decision SCOTUS would have to reverse Heller.
5). SCOTUS has declined to take up 2d Amendment cases since it decided Heller.
The logic in this case could mean that California's Prop 63 gets upheld.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Ask a question
Ask a question
Michigan Sportsman Forum
8.8M posts
94.9K members
Since 2000
A forum community dedicated to hunting and fishing enthusiasts in the Michigan area. Come join the discussion about safety, gear, tackle, tips, tricks, optics, hunting, gunsmithing, reviews, reports, accessories, classifieds, and more!