Supreme Court: Ban against full auto un-Constitutional

This is a discussion on Supreme Court: Ban against full auto un-Constitutional within the General Firearm Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Atleast, that'd be the headline if the provision inside the 1986 FOPA banning FA weapons after that date ever makes it to the Supreme Court, ...

Results 1 to 15 of 15
Like Tree4Likes
  • 2 Post By Badey
  • 1 Post By 10thmtn
  • 1 Post By 1010

Thread: Supreme Court: Ban against full auto un-Constitutional

  1. #1
    Member Array linuss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    DFW
    Posts
    297

    Supreme Court: Ban against full auto un-Constitutional

    Atleast, that'd be the headline if the provision inside the 1986 FOPA banning FA weapons after that date ever makes it to the Supreme Court, and for one simple reason: Miller.


    US v Miller, SCOTUS held that a weapon was not allowed because it was not 'in common use'. The corollary is that if a weapon is 'in common use', it's legal and allowed to be owned by civilians. FA rifles are 'in common use' by the military. Therefor, if they follow their own precedent, if this ever gets brought up in court, that subsection should be ruled unConstitutional. It's also predicated on the statement of "some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia".



    And that too, is why an AWB will not hold up in courts, if they follow jurisprudence: Not only are 'assault weapons' in common use by civilians, but also by the police and the military. There is no way to get around that one. And a 'military weapon' has some 'reasonable relationship' with a militia, does it not?




    Now... who wants to pony up the cash for this fight?

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    24,185
    Sounds like one that the SAF might well go after.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  4. #3
    VIP Member Array Badey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Posts
    2,578
    I say we deal with the current gun control fight, then take this one on after that.
    WINTEJER000 and shooterX like this.
    "All you need for happiness is a good gun, a good horse, and a good wife." - Daniel Boone

  5. #4
    VIP Member Array zacii's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    arizona
    Posts
    3,744

    Re: Supreme Court: Ban against full auto un-Constitutional

    It may be a possibility, and I agree with it in principle, but I think timing is off.

    Gotta know when to strike.

    Select fire weapons are not in common use among the population, thanks to the 86 law. So, I don't think it would fly on that alone.

    If it could be proven that the people have the right to keep and bear arms, the same arms as a soldier may bear, then that might open a door. But that is a long way off given the fight we have now.

    Time will tell.

    Sent from my Galaxy S2
    Trust in God and keep your powder dry

    "A heavily armed citizenry is not about overthrowing the government; it is about preventing the government from overthrowing liberty. A people stripped of their right of self defense is defenseless against their own government." -source

  6. #5
    Member Array Rattlehead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    120
    Quote Originally Posted by zacii View Post
    It may be a possibility, and I agree with it in principle, but I think timing is off.

    Gotta know when to strike.

    Select fire weapons are not in common use among the population, thanks to the 86 law. So, I don't think it would fly on that alone.

    If it could be proven that the people have the right to keep and bear arms, the same arms as a soldier may bear, then that might open a door.
    But that is a long way off given the fight we have now.

    Time will tell.

    Sent from my Galaxy S2
    Unless I'm mistaken, this exact point was what the Supreme Court decided in Miller (and was the basis for Miller's loss).

    "In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a "shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length" at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment, or that its use could contribute to the common defense."

    United States v. Miller

  7. #6
    Distinguished Member Array lchamp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Florida's Space Coast.
    Posts
    1,602
    It will be interesting to see how this unfolds. Perhaps the roar of the antis will come back to bite them...or not...

  8. #7
    VIP Member Array 10thmtn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,674
    IIRC, the SC stated in the Heller decision that regulations that prohibit things like machine guns and carrying a firearm into a court room would be Constitutional.

    "Common use" means commonly used by civilians - not the military.

    Sorry, but you're barking up the wrong tree. Let's worry about protecting our rights. This is not the time to be inflaming the issue by trying to get full auto legalized. Besides - can't afford the ammo anyway.
    shooterX likes this.
    The more good folks carry guns, the fewer shots the crazies can get off.
    www.armedcitizensnetwork.org - member
    Glock 30, 19, 26; Ruger LCP (2), LCR, Mini 14; Remington 870; Marlin 336 .30-30
    CT Lasers

  9. #8
    481
    481 is offline
    Member Array 481's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    US
    Posts
    492
    Quote Originally Posted by 10thmtn View Post
    IIRC, the SC stated in the Heller decision that regulations that prohibit things like machine guns and carrying a firearm into a court room would be Constitutional.

    "Common use" means commonly used by civilians - not the military.
    This is what I have been led to believe, too. Of course, the silver lining to the current buying panic is that the exact gun that gets the anti's panties all bunched-up is the one that is flying off of dealer's shelves making it all the more "commonly used by civilians". Kinda nice even if it is kind of inconvenient.
    My favorite "gun" book-

    QUANTITATIVE AMMUNITION SELECTION

  10. #9
    Member Array BeefyG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    166
    I wonder if hoarding still technically counts as use.

  11. #10
    VIP Member Array Eagleks's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    7,411
    Quote Originally Posted by linuss View Post
    There is no way to get around that one. And a 'military weapon' has some 'reasonable relationship' with a militia, does it not?

    Now... who wants to pony up the cash for this fight?
    An AR ... is a semi-auto , with semi-auto technology, don't confuse it with military weapons, that seems to be what has caused the issue in the first place.
    I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts. --- Will Rogers ---
    Chief Justice John Roberts : "I don't see how you can read Heller and not take away from it the notion that the Second Amendment...was extremely important to the framers in their view of what liberty meant."

  12. #11
    Senior Member Array stanislaskasava's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    1,104
    The Constitution means what it means, regardless of previous Supreme Court bumbling. Our right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed... Especially to keep and bear the very same arms that are in common use by soldiers. How else can we maintain a well-regulated militia?

    What use is the right to keep and bear spitwads and bottle rockets? Disarming The People is the foundation of tyranny.

  13. #12
    VIP Member
    Array Echo_Four's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Land of the mostly free
    Posts
    2,627
    Stare Decisis is only useful as far as a current court agrees with a previous court. Nothing in Miller would force a current court to rule in any manner. While Heller does uphold the common use clause in Miller it in no way indicates that the Court is ready to allow full autos to come back to the market. If anything they language leaves one to believe the court would rule against allowing it to happen.
    "The only people I like besides my wife and children are Marines."
    - Lt. Col. Oliver North

  14. #13
    Distinguished Member Array Exacto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    1,487
    Your still thinking pre-Obama. We have a ruler now, not a president. The supreme court and the Constitution are on his hit list as well.
    Let your plans be dark and impenetrable as night, and when you move, fall like a thunder bolt...... Sun Tzu.

    The supreme art of war is to defeat the enemy without fighting........ Sun Tzu.

  15. #14
    Member Array 1010's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    MS
    Posts
    47
    The Protection act was passed in CONG , it was not a EXEC order like what Barry is looking to do.

    CONG banned the AW weapons in 86, atleast thats what politicians called them, so WTH are we banning now!!
    Exacto likes this.

  16. #15
    VIP Member Array dukalmighty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    texas
    Posts
    15,094
    Quote Originally Posted by Eagleks View Post
    An AR ... is a semi-auto , with semi-auto technology, don't confuse it with military weapons, that seems to be what has caused the issue in the first place.
    According to swinestein I could convert one with bubble gum and a shoestring
    "Outside of the killings, Washington has one of the lowest crime rates in the country,"
    --Mayor Marion Barry, Washington , DC .

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

automatic weapons ban constitutional

,
court ruling on full auto ban
,

full auto ban

,

full auto ban unconstitutional

,
full auto is constitutional
,
fully automatic weapons banned by supreme court
,
fully automatic weapons constitutional
,
fully automatic weapons constitutionally
,
supreme court fully automatic weapons
,
un ban full auto
,
will full auto ban ever be overturned?
,

will full auto ever be legal

Click on a term to search for related topics.