Display posts from previous
Sort by

Re: Fourth Circuit rehears challenge to Maryland assault weapons ban

52 by highdesert
The Supreme Court remanded this case for reconsideration in light of Bruen, a task
which we shall, with great respect, perform. We conclude that Bruen did not mandate an
abandonment of our faith in self-governance, nor did it leave the balance struck throughout
our history of firearms regulation behind
Sounds like the 9th Circuit. Yes hope Bianchi et al appeals to SCOTUS for cert.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: Fourth Circuit rehears challenge to Maryland assault weapons ban

54 by DispositionMatrix
On the 13-month delay, from the dissent:
https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/211255.P.pdf
A panel then heard oral argument on December 6, 2022. But
after more than thirteen months of delay, the judges of this Court took the case from the
assigned panel and granted initial hearing en banc.2
We then requested more briefing, and
we held en banc oral argument on March 20, 2024.
2 This unorthodox procedural posture bears some explanation. After hearing the
case in December 2022, the initial panel majority reached a decision and promptly
circulated a draft opinion. Yet for more than a year, no dissent was circulated. The panel
thus held the proposed opinion in accordance with our custom that majority and dissenting
opinions be published together. A year later—as the proposed opinion sat idle—a different
panel heard arguments in United States v. Price (No. 22-4609), which also involved
interpreting and applying Bruen. The Price panel quickly circulated a unanimous opinion
that reached a conclusion at odds with the Bianchi majority’s year-old proposed opinion.
Facing two competing proposed published opinions, the Court declined to let the earlier
circulated opinion control. Rather, in January 2024, we “invoked the once-extraordinary
mechanism of initial-en-banc review.” Mayor of Balt. v. Azar, 799 F. App’x 193, 195–96
(4th Cir. 2020) (Richardson, J., dissenting). I hope that we will not find ourselves in this
posture again soon. Cf. United States v. Gibbs, 905 F.3d 768, 770 (4th Cir. 2018) (Wynn,
J., voting separately) (suggesting that majority opinions may be issued without awaiting
dissenting opinions to prohibit those dissenting opinions from exercising a “pocket veto”
to “deny or delay fairness and justice”).

Re: Fourth Circuit rehears challenge to Maryland assault weapons ban

56 by CDFingers
Interesting vid. The case against "dangerous and unusual weapons" indeed will end up at the Supreme Court.

Upon reflection, I think the biggest factor that prevents a ban is that there are so many millions of AR style rifles out there. Not everyone would "turn it in," necessitating all kinds of gun fights all over the place. I think the better approach is to persuade folks not to shoot each other, which is a clear reference to Root Cause Mitigation strategies.

CDF
Shake it up now, Sugaree. I'll meet you at the Jubilee.
And if that Jubilee don't come, maybe I'll meet you on the run.

Re: Fourth Circuit rehears challenge to Maryland assault weapons ban

57 by CowboyT
Agreed. Virtually every home and hamlet in Switzerland has either a full-auto (machine-gun) SIG 556 rifle, or that same rifle converted to semi-automatic only, inside of it. I'm not seeing reports of Swiss people shooting at each other, despite all that actual, real military hardware in private homes and hands.

We didn't have this problem before. We weren't shooting at each other as a general rule, not so long ago. We've discussed this before, and I continue to maintain that it the vast majority of the problem boils down to a failure in parenting. Parents need to actually raise their kids to do right and care about others. I've seen far, far too many examples of that not happening over the last 30-40 years. When I was working in the school system, I really saw it then.
"SF Liberal With A Gun + Free Software Advocate"
http://www.sanfranciscoliberalwithagun.com/
http://www.liberalsguncorner.com/
Image

Re: Fourth Circuit rehears challenge to Maryland assault weapons ban

64 by sikacz
featureless wrote: Wed Aug 28, 2024 11:24 am The problem here is, if the 2A does not protect the AR-15, it does not protect any semi auto rifle. If the 2A does not protect "military style" arms, it does not protect knives, 1911s, P320s, S&W M&P, 92, etc. that is clearly in conflict with Heller, Miller and the accurate understanding of the 2A.
Judges and politicians with agendas don’t care about accurate readings. They believe in creating enough opposite rulings to muddy the waters and when they have the right Supreme Court they will overturn the 2A favorable rulings. Just like Roe v Wade.
Image
Image

"Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated!" Loquacious of many. Texas Chapter Chief Cat Herder.

Re: Fourth Circuit rehears challenge to Maryland assault weapons ban

65 by VodoundaVinci
sikacz wrote: Wed Aug 28, 2024 11:33 am
featureless wrote: Wed Aug 28, 2024 11:24 am The problem here is, if the 2A does not protect the AR-15, it does not protect any semi auto rifle. If the 2A does not protect "military style" arms, it does not protect knives, 1911s, P320s, S&W M&P, 92, etc. that is clearly in conflict with Heller, Miller and the accurate understanding of the 2A.
Judges and politicians with agendas don’t care about accurate readings. They believe in creating enough opposite rulings to muddy the waters and when they have the right Supreme Court they will overturn the 2A favorable rulings. Just like Roe v Wade.
My opinion is that this is true - it has been proven in this State. A number of proponents of the Illinois PICA/Assault Weapons Ban have said that they are skeptical that this will survive SCOTUS scrutiny but it *will* take years to get there and be deliberated and if it is found to be unconstitutional and struck down? The same folks who passed PICA will ignore the Supreme Court and/or just pass another law with the same restrictions and get what they want for another number of years before SCOTUS gets to the new law. The "powers that be" want it to be as difficult as possible to possess firearms they deem to be counter to their owners and operators agenda. SCOTUS is powerless to enforce their decisions against determined opposition.

They'll just keep up the harassment until they get a Blue leaning SCOTUS and then they'll effectively redefine the 2A to allow only what they deem is safe for US to possess. My guess is that eventually all semi autos will be restricted/banned. Look at Illinois or Mass. and you'll see what the future of gun possession will be in the US in 20ish years.

VooDoo
Tyrants disarm the people they intend to oppress. Hope is not a Plan.

Dot 'em if ya got 'em!
Post Reply

Return to “A Well Regulated Militia...”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests