Top Categories

Federal Judge Ruling: AR-15′s and AK-47′s Not Protected by 2A

U.S. District Judge Catherine C. Blake upheld a Maryland law banning the sale of so-called “assault rifles” and magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds, finding that it did not violate the Constitution. However, Maryland gun laws were not the only thing at stake in this case. In a 47-page opinion issued today, Judge Blake ruled that semi-automatic rifles like the AR-15 are not protected by the Second Amendment (emphasis added):

Upon review of all the parties’ evidence, the court seriously doubts that the banned assault long guns are commonly possessed for lawful purposes, particularly self-defense in the home, which is at the core of the Second Amendment right, and is inclined to find the weapons fall outside Second Amendment protection as dangerous and unusual.

This sets a dangerous precedent that other states are likely to follow. A little over a year ago, we discussed the topic of whether or not an “assault weapon” ban would be constitutional. The short version: weapons that are not “in common use” and are “especially dangerous” can be lawfully restricted. The fact that Judge Blake ruled that America’s Rifle, the AR-15, is not in common use is beyond ridiculous.

As far as the AR-15 being dangerous – well yeah, they are dangerous. That’s why we want them.

You can read the 47 page ruling here, and read more from the Washington Times here.

20 Responses to Federal Judge Ruling: AR-15′s and AK-47′s Not Protected by 2A

  1. HoG_Timmons August 12, 2014 at 4:38 pm #

    You HAVE to be freaking kidding me!

    • glenux August 14, 2014 at 1:13 am #

      Remember the final arbiters are not any court. The final arbiters are the People.

  2. DrSique August 12, 2014 at 4:43 pm #

    Judge Catherine C. Blake, another cockeyed liberal rewriting the people’s Constitution from the bench. The “core of the Second Amendment” is not for home protection. It is to protect our nation from tyranny by affording Americans the ability to fight back against it or, better yet, to keep it from rearing it’s ugly head at all. These leftist are under the mistaken impression that, if they continue to erode the protections guaranteed under the 2A, Americans will just hand over their firearms. God given rights cannot be taken away by a lesser power. Therefore, unless liberals can get God Almighty to come down and take away my RIGHT to bear arms, they are going to meet some fierce resistance.

    • mshean August 13, 2014 at 3:43 am #

      “But to ban guns because criminals use them is to tell the innocent and law-abiding that their rights and liberties depend not on their own conduct, but on the conduct of the guilty and the lawless, and that the law will permit them to have only such rights and liberties as the lawless will allow. …
      For society does not control crime, ever, by forcing the law-abiding to accommodate themselves to the expected behavior of criminals.
      Society controls crime by forcing the criminals to accommodate themselves to the expected behavior of the law-abiding.” Jeff Snyder

  3. TK August 12, 2014 at 4:43 pm #

    Bat shit crazy. Molon labe.

    • john August 14, 2014 at 5:34 am #

      Not crazy – IGNORANT and STUPID. Judge clearly doesn’t know anything about firearms.

      The judge is wrong. You continue to have natural and constitutional rights – REGARDLESS of this unconstitutional ruling.

      At some point, when judges are politicians – you ignore what they say.

    • Gary Rumer August 14, 2014 at 11:09 am #

      Exactly as these anti gun Nazis will never stop because this is just the beginning for them. The second amendment was written in to provide us a means to defend ourselves from government tyranny and we are at form of tyranny right now. It will only get worse as these power hungry politicians will always want more power and the circle of liberty will shrink.

  4. schmidlin August 12, 2014 at 4:53 pm #

    So with this ruling. TV and computer type media are not protected by the 1st. Neither would your car be protected from illegal search and seizures.

    Slippery slope people

  5. muscoe August 12, 2014 at 4:55 pm #

    Bring a lunch and plenty of body bags.

  6. thejaundicedmonocle August 12, 2014 at 5:19 pm #

    “the court seriously doubts that the banned assault long guns are commonly possessed for lawful purposes, particularly self-defense in the home, which is at the core of the Second Amendment right”

    1. The 2nd Amendment has no stipulation on Arms being “commonly possessed for lawful purposes”.
    2. The core of the Second Amendment right is not “self-defense in the home” but prohibiting the government from infringement on citizens right to keep and bear Arms.

    Regarding… “This sets a dangerous precedent that other states are likely to follow.” Only if we concede that this sort of outlandish interpretation of our Bill of Rights is acceptable and allow this treasonous Judge to continue in her post.

  7. L. Burns August 12, 2014 at 5:28 pm #

    Fucking moron!!!

  8. Chris August 12, 2014 at 6:14 pm #

    Government employees in black robes confiring more power to government. Color me shocked.

  9. Felixx McWilliams August 12, 2014 at 6:22 pm #

    https://www.facebook.com/TheFallenAngelReturnsAgain/media_set?set=a.598733816846749.1073741825.100001304075342&type=1
    Because this is totally not using one of these so called ‘long assault weapons’ in a manner that is lawful.

  10. Brandon Brooks August 12, 2014 at 6:23 pm #

    Should be an easy appeal. Call every major firearms manufacturer and them what their most popular rifle is.

  11. Markmilstein August 12, 2014 at 7:31 pm #

    Hang the treasonous bitch

  12. Juan c h August 12, 2014 at 10:30 pm #

    That so call judge I hope that she chokes on her lunch tomorrow. Please God hear us good people that actually have served in the military and defended or country.

  13. mshean August 13, 2014 at 3:38 am #

    I see this is a female judge, I would bet my house she was appointed by Clinton, or Obama. She “seriously doubts these guns are possessed for lawful purposes”. Yet if she was pressed to show how many of these guns are actually used in crimes her reasoning would crumble.

    “But to ban guns because criminals use them is to tell the innocent and law-abiding that their rights and liberties depend not on their own conduct, but on the conduct of the guilty and the lawless, and that the law will permit them to have only such rights and liberties as the lawless will allow. …
    For society does not control crime, ever, by forcing the law-abiding to accommodate themselves to the expected behavior of criminals.
    Society controls crime by forcing the criminals to accommodate themselves to the expected behavior of the law-abiding.” Jeff Snyder

  14. teebonicust August 13, 2014 at 8:04 pm #

    “[T]he court seriously doubts that the banned assault long guns are commonly possessed for lawful purposes.”

    Seriously doubts? How about having called for statistical evidence regarding the common ownership of so-called “assault long guns” for lawful purposes before ruling?

    The court erred, and this decision will be reversed.

  15. Uncomon Sense August 14, 2014 at 9:51 pm #

    It’s ironic that this country’s rise and fall from freedom began in the North East…
    There wouldn’t happen to be ‘lines’ being drawn over a ‘national issue’ by the states..would there?

  16. Jacob Gonzales August 15, 2014 at 3:07 pm #

    One of those things that wasn’t forseen, but this IDIOT twist it to their own benefit. What a putz

%d bloggers like this: