If you listen to leftist politicians and/or watch the mainstream media at all, it can be easy to become discouraged about the news that you hear about gun rights. Those politicians and their media cronies paint gun owners in an ugly light and blame us for when criminals do evil things even though, often, we’re the ones who stop the criminals.
It’s a constant fight against their misinformation.
Fortunately, though, there is occasional good news, and even leftist nutcase regimes in states who seemed to be owned by a certain “blue” political party don’t always get their way.
This is one of those happy stories (hat tip to here for the lead). AWR Hawkins writes,
California’s “assault weapons” ban was ruled unconstitutional Friday in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California.
The case, Miller v. Bonta, argued California’s ban on so-called “assault weapons” violated the Second Amendment.
The judge in the case, George W. Bush appointee Roger T. Benitez, wrote,
The Second Amendment “elevates above all other interests the right of law-abiding, responsible citizens to use arms in defense of hearth and home.” Heller, 554 U.S., at 635. The Supreme Court clearly holds that the Second Amendment protects guns commonly owned by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes. At the same time, “the Second Amendment confers an individual right to keep and bear arms . . . that ‘have some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia.’”
Benitez continued:
There is no evidence that the Supreme Court intended that language [in the heller case] to be a license to avoid [the] common sense holding [of “assault rifles”] in average contexts.
Additionally, Benitez specifically said that Heller did not limit ownership of “assault rifles” to military or militia service and also wrote:
As an aside, the ‘assault weapon’ epithet is a bit of a misnomer. These prohibited guns, like all guns, are dangerous weapons. However, these prohibited guns, like all guns, can be used for ill or for good. They could just as well be called ‘home defense rifles’ or ‘anti-crime guns.
Basically, Judge Benitez took the California assault weapons ban apart from both a legal and practical position.
It’s good to see that someone in a U.S. District Court actually knows the law and what they’re doing. Good for Judge Benitez. We need more intelligent, thoughtful, and honest judges on benches in the U.S. who are willing to do the same thing.
Home defense gun sounds a lot better than assault weapon.
Thank that judge for making this ruling.
I have trained in the martial arts for many years. Does that make my hands assault weapons?
How many years? It doesn’t matter how long you trained! You see try trained with a commando! Or a navy seal! It two different type of martial art! If you think you can protect yourself under what you learned. Think again! Once you get black belt hope you register with sheriff department. Because it illegal to use one on one!
SEABEETOM The answer to your question is Yes, your hands must be amputated and turned in to the federal government.
Absolutely! There is no such thing as an “assault weapon” in gun lexicon. The true “assault rifle” – a translation from the German “sturmgewehr” – is capable of full auto via a selector lever and requires a Federal Machine Gun Permit to own and about $20,000 to buy. The anti-gun activists insist on calling the AR types “Assault Rifles but “AR” stands for “Armalite Rifle” after the company that developed it.
Who will these anti police and the anti gunners call when there life is in danger. It surely will not be me helping them.
And the British hated those long barrel Kentucky rifles too. Assault weapons of the day, now not so much except for to put on the mantle and discuss.
food for the judge!
excuse me; GOOD for the judge!!
I am glad that a common sense Judge finally reduced the stupid language of leftist politicians language to the level of gutter trash.
Hallelujah. Finally,,, a P-A-T-R-I-O-T and TRUE AMERICAN judge, who see’s through those gun controlling idiots in Wasgington, and stands up for our freedom and right as Americans, to bear arms , and doesn’t cave in to their liberalist bs. This is America. You can’t punish EVERYONE, because of the hate and stupidity of a few morons.
You hate guns? Why? Xan you explain to me how that gun kill someone? I have never seen a gun get up an shoot someone! But I have seen it lay there without moving! So you dumb people, please tell me if you RATHER LIVE OR DIED AT THE HANDS OF AN EVIL PERSON? You are to stupid to understand anything. Just as a democrats politicians or liberal politicians! Maybe you don’t have a BRAIN THAT WORK! IS AOC ONE OF YOUR KINFOLK? You see if you have study history you will see PEOPLE WHO KNOW HOW TO USE A GUN SAVE YOUR LIFE! BUT A CRIMINAL OR EVIL PERSON WILL TAKE YOUR LIFE! If you hate gun just purchase a million dollars life insurance policy. Make me the beneficial of it! Because once a thugs or criminal attack you. I’m rich!
The simple response to your great question(s) is that if they were honest, politicians would adopt versions of some of the Asian laws like in those in Indonesia, but not quite as draconian. Those laws are directed at those who commit CRIMES with guns, not the guns.
For example, why not adopt a law stating;
1. Bring a gun to a crime without displaying it get 1 to 2 years in prison.
2. Display a weapon in a crime get 2 to 3 years.
3. Fire the weapon without harming anyone get 3 to 5 years
4. Wound someone in a crime with a weapon get 20 years to life.
5. Kill someone with a gun it’s an automatic death sentence.
6. When it comes to accomplices, like drivers in drive by shootings, apply the same penalties to all.
The real jump in penalties should when someone is wounded or killed, including accomplice who get in the line of fire.
Florida has such a law, it’s called 10,20, LIFE!
The 10-20-Life law in Florida requires a defendant to be sentenced to the law’s maximum allowable extent for the committed felony. The mandatory sentences must be completed consecutively to any additional sentence an offender must serve.
The three main mandatory sentences include:
at least ten years for producing ( brandishing) a firearm during the commission of certain felonies;
at least a 20-year prison sentence for firing a firearm;
a maximum penalty is a life sentence unless the defendant is charged with felony murder or first-degree murder in which case the maximum is the death penalty if the firearm is used to shoot someone.
Florida has such a law, it’s called 10,20, LIFE!
The 10-20-Life law in Florida requires a defendant to be sentenced to the law’s maximum allowable extent for the committed felony. The mandatory sentences must be completed consecutively to any additional sentence an offender must serve.
The three main mandatory sentences include:
at least ten years for producing ( brandishing) a firearm during the commission of certain felonies;
at least a 20-year prison sentence for firing a firearm;
a maximum penalty is a life sentence unless the defendant is charged with felony murder or first-degree murder in which case the maximum is the death penalty if the firearm is used to shoot someone.
I’m waiting for the next SCOTUS ruling in light of DC vs. Heller and Chicago vs. McDonald. In the former, the Court ruled that individuals had the right to own and keep guns in their homes in DC. In the latter, since liberals claimed the former only applied to DC since it was a FEDERAL district, the Court extended the Heller decision to ALL the States via the 14th Amendment. In neither case did the Court make any distinction as to type of guns other than those covered under existing federal law.
Now it should be asked, what good is it to own a weapon in a home all locked up? Does the right to BEAR arms in the 2nd Amendment not mean to bear ANYWHERE except perhaps in controlled government building or base? Thus a new SCOTUS ruling could very well negate most gun laws as unconstitutional.
The only constitutional restriction on weapons that I see are those on banning those ADJUDICATED as mentally ill from owning weapons, those convicted of VIOLENT crimes, and those who are not yet citizens (legal residents and visitors) unless they’ve gotten special permits.
By the way, my favorite “weapon” to own would be an Cessna A-37. 😉
Chicago: Concealed carry saved the day!
When will the DEMONS realize that the REAL AMERICANS WILL SAVE THE COUNTRY!
And that ONLY GUNS will do that!
VADE RETRO SATANAS! ERRARE HUMANUM EST. PERSEVERARE DIABOLICUM!
I agree wholly with the judges rational and true understanding of the founding Fathers reason for the 2nd amendment. Too bad there are so many simple minded people in our nation who are so brainwashed with left-wing lies. The left will never understand that guns don’t kill people do and because of this fact our mental health programs are a sham. Yes, blame the guns and not the violent people who kill others using them. Fact: the majority of gun violence in America is black on black. Why is this, simple the left has taken away the black family and made them a slave of the state by giving them free stuff, poor education and the right to be a vistime that the DNC uses as their tool. Since before the Civil War minorities have been exploited by the democrats and today we see this continuing with BLM, CRT, and 1619 Project and such Marxists ideologies. Now e come to the truth, the Marxist have been plotting for decades to destroy America fro within and by eliminating patriotic Americans and taking away their ability to defend themselves the left can easily control all peoples. EVery word that comes out of a democratic politicians mouth, state and federal levels, are aimed at destroying American’s ideals, families, and make them more dependent on government. All part of the plan by the Marxists in government and we are letting them do it. Thanks to this one judge we see there is someone willing to stand up for America. Never believe any person on the left if they say they are patriots…they are lying.
Pure and simple the lefts gun control policies are all about control of the people, their misinformation to the anti gunners does exactly what they want it to do to divide the people. Make people who know nothing about guns scared and worried that if their neighbors or relatives own guns it puts the anti gun peoples lives in danger and gives them the impression that with gun control laws it will somehow reduce mass shootings. What they don’t tell people is it is the person who pulls the trigger is the danger mostly due to mental illness of those people. Liberals never put the blame where it belongs.
Its not the only law that VIOLATES the 2nd. Amendment they all do …
Assault rifles is a misnomer all weapons could be named assault weapons even knives can kill. I believe though that AR 15’s, AK47’s and others that fall into that category are not “hunting rifles, they were built for the military to kill other men trying to kill them. My belief as an army Vet of 11 years is to do a viable background check on civilian to be able to buy weapons, he’ll her in Texas I went. Bought a S&W M&P walked out the same day an hour later with 6 notes of rounds my new gun and 6 clips that held 10 rounds in .380 as my new conceal carry gun. Now I carried a top secret security clearance in the Army so unless you have a felony that prevents you from owning a gun then why not pass the background check, I for one wouldn’t mind after walking out of cabela’s loaded for bear I was amazed that others were doing the same no wonder the cops are fearful. We need to fully arm and train and nationalize the police in America training in language,urban warfare, border patrol and all other forms of policing after a 6 year course they are bilingual and are superior marksman and have the tools they trained for weeding out those that can’t or shouldn’t have access to weapons. Then unleash them with ROE’s that allows them to shoot to kill others on all gang affiliated people committing a crime with a weapon. Reviewed by the police board not a civilian board the knows nothing about what it takes to wear the uniform. So, more in depth background checks and a police face that is effective trained and nationalized would help clear the 2nd amendment up and protect our officers.
Comments are closed.