Biden must come out today and request a ban on assault weapons.

[dutch508]

joetheman (322 posts)
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100215342147

Biden must come out today and request a ban on assault weapons. Put the GOP and gun huggers
in the spotlight. There must be a vote on this. Win lose or draw, all the cards should be on the table. The anti-maskers and anti-gun control are mostly the same people. They don't care who dies and are helping to kill us all.

 

WarGamer (858 posts)

2. It would never reach a vote because... filibuster

And after Heller, an AWB is probably unconstitutional, especially with Barf, GoodHair, Handmaiden, Sleepy, Scalito and JR on the Court.

hack89 (38,724 posts)

6. Heller allows strict gun control including AWBs

Several state AWBs have been found constitutional post Heller. Heller says you have the right to own a handgun in your home for self defense. That is it.

WarGamer (858 posts)

7. You're reading the decision rather selectively.

Let's start.

From Harvard Law and Policy Review:

To the question “what is protected under the Second Amendment?”, Heller answers: those firearms in “common use for lawful purposes like self-defense.”[3] “Common use” suggests two possibilities.One is a narrow, numerical standard that would protect best-selling models from popular manufacturers but allow prohibitions on obscure brands of essentially the same gun. The other view is that “common use” means functionally common. This view would protect the entire class of similarly functioning guns regardless of whether millions were sold by popular makers.

Functional commonality is the better and really the only defensible view for two reasons. First, the cribbed numerical approach produces the same kind of equal protection problem that prompted challenges and then amendments to California’s assault weapons ban.[4] It is difficult to justify drastically different treatment of owners and manufacturers of functionally identical guns.

The second objection is that the common use standard derives from the eighteenth-century understanding that citizens were expected to answer the militia call with arms “provided by themselves in common use at the time for lawful purposes like self defense.”[5] Gun manufacturing at the time was pre-assembly line. Most private firearms were functionally similar, but every gun was essentially custom-made.[6] So, the common use standard was not and is not source specific.



So... with Heller language, AWB are certainly "in common use" and with the current makeup of SCOTUS, an AWB would be found unconstitutional.

Speaking of unconstitutional, did you read this?

https://www.npr.org/2020/08/14/902676422/federal-appeals-court-throws-out-california-ban-on-large-capacity-gun-magazines

In a blow to gun control activists, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on Friday that California's ban on large-capacity ammunition magazines is unconstitutional, violating the Second Amendment.

In a 2-1 decision, the panel of judges found that such firearm magazines are protected arms under the Second Amendment and are not "unusual arms" that would fall outside its scope.




This is all really basic stuff... I'm not using obscure readings of the law to justify myself.

hack89 (38,724 posts)

15. That ruling had more to do with handguns than rifles

Heller says you can own a handgun for self defense. That CA ruling says that banning the magazines used in the majority of handguns violates Heller.

WarGamer (858 posts)

16. That's the focus of Heller

But the language will be used to defend Assault Weapons which CLEARLY qualify as Common Use firearms.

Several of the exceptions you noted are all pre-2019 and don't reflect the Trump Federal Courts.

NY also lost the court case re: magazine capacity

There will not be another 1994 AWB. Politically and Constitutionally it's done.

I think we'll see an AWB case make it to SCOTUS soon. They can't keep avoiding it.

What happened the late time the Government marched out to take the people weapons?

WarGamer (858 posts)

18. When one of the MANY Assault weapon cases comes before SCOTUS

You think they'll lean towards the Circuit Courts?

I don't.

I think the Circuit Court cases in NY, CT, MA, etc... will be taken down.

Star Member USALiberal (7,681 posts)

3. There are thousands in public already....

And you’ll never collect them all.

Anyone can buy one and if not they can buy an illegal one that was stolen.

The big question is why people in the United States want [the ability] to kill a bunch of people

The Answer:

WarGamer (858 posts)

8. actually tens of millions.

I think I read 15-17 million AR15's by themselves.

YMB (7 posts)

19. Thats also a conservative

number based on actual sales according to the FBI (or was it ATF?). So that doesnt include private sales nor home made "ghost guns". Considering that, the real number could be in the 20+ million. And thats just AR15's, doesnt include other stuff like AK's, Mini-14's ect. or "Battle Rifles" like the M1a, FAL, G3 and the like which also fall under the "assault weapon" category.

Star Member Kingofalldems (33,705 posts)

14. Wow the gunners jumped right in with NRA/GOP talking points.

 

Star Member Kingofalldems (33,705 posts)

23. Ahhh, guns.

Democrats are for gun control, repubs and Trump cultists are not. That's a fact.

 

[landofconfusion80]

Simo hayha killed over 500 communists during the soviet invasion of Finland. He used a common bolt action mosin nagant variant to protect himself and his country. He didn't need an "assault rifle" to achieve his numbers. Same story in leningrad with the same weapon. My kid owns one, would that be considered in the ban?