CA judge says semi auto not protected under 2A

[SilentStalkr]

CA Judge: Semiautomatic rifles aren't protected by 2A, says they fire "500 rounds per minute"

Buckle up, it is about to get good. In her ruling, Staton called the rifles “incredibly effective killing machines” that are not needed for self-defense.

www.lawenforcementtoday.com

Is it time yet?

 

[MtnCreek]

Say when... ;-/

 

[SilentStalkr]

Say when... ;-/

Past time my man.

 

[MtnCreek]

Past time my man.

About ready to give up on being Roy Rogers...

 

[Maggot]

Shes right they ARE "incredibly effective killing machines." Thats why our military uses them. On the other hand they can be a lot of fun for target shooting, hunting, and "incredibly effective killing machines." for home defense.

Whats not to love?

 

[Unknown]

Clearly the judge's decision is based more on fear and feelings than on logic and a correct evaluation of facts.

If the level of force used is appropriate to the situation, the means by which that force is applied is of no consequence. In other words, if deadly force is appropriate, why would it matter if it was applied by a bolt action firearm, spear, select fire weapon, sword or sharpened stick.

The judge's opinion aside, I would rather have a tool designed to do the job of defending myself properly than have to use a big rock. Similarly, I could move a household with a pickup truck, but a large moving van would make the task much easier. So if I am justified in protecting myself from a marauding mob, I would rather have a modern firearm designed for that task, rather than having to use a musket with a bayonet on its end.

 

[ArmyJerry]

The 2A is for killing unconstitutional despotic government and its agents.

Shes right they ARE "incredibly effective killing machines." Thats why our military uses them. On the other hand they can be a lot of fun for target shooting, hunting, and "incredibly effective killing machines." for home defense.

Whats not to love?

 

[deersniper]

Clearly the judge's decision is based more on fear and feelings than on logic and a correct evaluation of facts.

If the level of force used is appropriate to the situation, the means by which that force is applied is of no consequence. In other words, if deadly force is appropriate, why would it matter if it was applied by a bolt action firearm, spear, select fire weapon, sword or sharpened stick.

The judge's opinion aside, I would rather have a tool designed to do the job of defending myself properly than have to use a big rock. Similarly, I could move a household with a pickup truck, but a large moving van would make the task much easier. So if I am justified in protecting myself from a marauding mob, I would rather have a modern firearm designed for that task, rather than having to use a musket with a bayonet on its end.

Well she's female. So.



Oh and speaking of rocks to defend yourself. Nope no big rocks. Only small ones.

 

[brianf]

That argument has been used before.
I remember reading that the law was written when only single shot muskets.

Bunch of hippy-commi crap

 

[theLBC]

moron labia

 

[deersniper]

When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.

 

[Gunfighter14e2]

This is what happens to a system that becomes 100% political, an the only out or correction is to burn it all to the ground,..,.. Get ready. to get some,...,...

 

[theLBC]

When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

 

[_Windrider_]

 

[Sean the Nailer]

Was that 'law' written using a quill and iron ball ink? If any other methods were used, the law was illegal, due to the fact that it's manner wasn't covered by the First Amendment. Such venues didn't exist back then.

 

[Unknown]

That argument has been used before.
I remember reading that the law was written when only single shot muskets.

Bunch of hippy-commi crap

And the first amendment was written before any electronic transmission of information was possible. So by that logic, then the first amendment should not apply to television, radio, internet, records, tapes, or any other electronic means of communication.

 

[Snipe260]

Her and Cali are irrelevant here in my neck of the woods!

 

[broncoaz]

More bullshit from liberal judges. Hopefully Trump finishes filling all the open slots and gets another Supreme Court pick this term.

 

[10ring'r]

99.9% of the time, when we "stop" someone from harming/killing us, don't they end up dying?? Center-mass/pump station and all? She is right, "incredibly effective" stopping machines. Mac

 

[10ring'r]

Clearly the judge's decision is based more on fear and feelings than on logic and a correct evaluation of facts.

If the level of force used is appropriate to the situation, the means by which that force is applied is of no consequence. In other words, if deadly force is appropriate, why would it matter if it was applied by a bolt action firearm, spear, select fire weapon, sword or sharpened stick.

The judge's opinion aside, I would rather have a tool designed to do the job of defending myself properly than have to use a big rock. Similarly, I could move a household with a pickup truck, but a large moving van would make the task much easier. So if I am justified in protecting myself from a marauding mob, I would rather have a modern firearm designed for that task, rather than having to use a musket with a bayonet on its end.

I agree totally with this statement. This is were the "slippery slope" starts, once they have their way and pass their commie laws, bolt guns will be next, then it will be semi-auto handguns (or vice-versa). The commie's want America disarmed, period. It's all part of the "process" and they have played the long game and now instead of the calendar running out, it's now the clock that's ticking. Mac

 

[Jefe's Dope]

"She decided that semi-automatic rifles should be deemed “dangerous and unusual weapons” that are used in military service, not civilian homes, and therefore not protected by the Second Amendment."

So... A militia is an individual and the 2nd Amendment is a right of the individual? Because that's what you just said. Regardless of how you feel about semi-automatics vs. muskets.

 

[sea2summit]

The 2A is for killing unconstitutional despotic government and its agents.

This is approximately the reason my children recite when asked why we have a certain weapon or quantity of ammunition. 2A is not about hunting, home defense, or anything other than keeping the government respectful of the people.

 

[Jsp556]

Fuck her.

 

[sea2summit]

Her and Cali are irrelevant here in my neck of the woods!

It’s already going up. This could get ugly.

 

[nn8734]

The communists are trying to turn American Citizens into subjects. Using everything tactic and strategy they can think of. Try as they might, in the end they will fail.

 

[ArmyJerry]

The constitution regulates government not the people, fuck government and the courts.

 

[SilentStalkr]

This may be the time gents. Everything is moving at warp speed now. We shall see what the next few days looks like. If it goes longer than a week there will be a push and I bet Trump and the republicans fall right in line. Is this the spark? Time will tell.

 

[ArmyJerry]

Well, defend your rights and property with all force required.

 

[quietmike]

SCOTUS said, in Caetano v Massachusetts, that the 2A applies to all bearable arms, even those not in existence at the time of the founders.

Someome should give her a copy of that opinion, and horse whip her from her ankles to her shoulders until she can repeat it.

 

[Marinevet1]

I believe it says......."Shall not be infringed"................fuck em all........