Ruling upholds Massachusetts’ ban on AR-15s

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • pcfixer

    Ultimate Member
    May 24, 2009
    5,948
    Marylandstan
    In a sad turn of events, U.S. District Court Judge William Young has issued a ruling that upholds Massachusetts’ ban on AR-15s and large-capacity magazines.

    His reasoning? He says AR-15s are NOT protected by the 2nd Amendment (!!).

    He wrote:

    "The AR-15 and its analogs, along with large capacity magazines, are simply not weapons within the original meaning of the individual constitutional right to ‘bear arms’."

    Received email this morning on this. I don't know where to find the ruling online.
    Well maybe soon SCOTUS will hear 19-404 Worman v. Healey & GVR:thumbsup:
     

    Qbeam

    Ultimate Member
    Apr 16, 2008
    6,074
    Georgia
    So the internet/twitter/instagram should not be protected by the 1st Amendment, as those were not envisioned by the Founding Fathers?


    Q
     

    Seagrave1963

    Still learnin'
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 6, 2011
    10,003
    Eastern Shore
    In a sad turn of events, U.S. District Court Judge William Young has issued a ruling that upholds Massachusetts’ ban on AR-15s and large-capacity magazines.

    His reasoning? He says AR-15s are NOT protected by the 2nd Amendment (!!).

    He wrote:

    "The AR-15 and its analogs, along with large capacity magazines, are simply not weapons within the original meaning of the individual constitutional right to ‘bear arms’."

    Received email this morning on this. I don't know where to find the ruling online.
    Well maybe soon SCOTUS will hear 19-404 Worman v. Healey & GVR:thumbsup:

    Maybe Judge Young will use a quill and ink well to pen his ruling..........:sad20:
     

    Allen65

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Jun 29, 2013
    7,063
    Anne Arundel County
    In a sad turn of events, U.S. District Court Judge William Young has issued a ruling that upholds Massachusetts’ ban on AR-15s and large-capacity magazines.

    His reasoning? He says AR-15s are NOT protected by the 2nd Amendment (!!).

    He wrote:

    "The AR-15 and its analogs, along with large capacity magazines, are simply not weapons within the original meaning of the individual constitutional right to ‘bear arms’."

    Received email this morning on this. I don't know where to find the ruling online.
    Well maybe soon SCOTUS will hear 19-404 Worman v. Healey & GVR:thumbsup:

    That's only a District Court. District Court Judge Benson Everett Legg once ruled that Maryland's G&S was unconstitutional, too. The ruling didn't stick.

    This ruling will almost certainly be appealed, too, hopefully after SCOTUS grants cert to one of the 2A cases currently in their queue. It's a long game.
     

    Occam

    Not Even ONE Indictment
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 24, 2018
    20,239
    Montgomery County
    If only a judge like that would be honest and say, “I WISH that commonly owned weapons weren’t what the founders knew they must protect, so I’m simply going to ignore their many writings on the subject, and assert my desire as the standard.” Man up, your honor, and say what you mean. Chickensh!t ruling.
     

    Brychan

    Ultimate Member
    Apr 24, 2009
    8,391
    Baltimore
    That's one stupid judge. When the bill of rights was written there was not even a glimmer of thought about a weapon of war vs a weapon of peace. Still isn't a difference. Just plain BS.
     

    Matlack

    Scribe
    Dec 15, 2008
    8,555
    As the founding fathers would say, "There is a cauldron of tar and a pillow full of feathers with his name on it somewhere."
     

    jrosenberger

    Active Member
    Jan 19, 2011
    332
    NH
    You realize the opinion you're quoting came out just over two years ago and is being considered for review by SCOTUS today, right?
     

    jcutonilli

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 28, 2013
    2,474
    In a sad turn of events, U.S. District Court Judge William Young has issued a ruling that upholds Massachusetts’ ban on AR-15s and large-capacity magazines.

    His reasoning? He says AR-15s are NOT protected by the 2nd Amendment (!!).

    He wrote:

    "The AR-15 and its analogs, along with large capacity magazines, are simply not weapons within the original meaning of the individual constitutional right to ‘bear arms’."

    Received email this morning on this. I don't know where to find the ruling online.
    Well maybe soon SCOTUS will hear 19-404 Worman v. Healey & GVR:thumbsup:

    You left off the part where he ended with

    "Justice Scalia would be proud. "

    You realize the opinion you're quoting came out just over two years ago and is being considered for review by SCOTUS today, right?

    The conference was yesterday not today. Once all of the oral arguments are done for the term, they move to weekly conferences on Thursdays until the end of the term (end of June)
     

    adit

    ReMember
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 20, 2013
    19,507
    DE
    It's actually good news, unless you live in MA.

    Another leftist judge exposed himself.

    Differences of opinion should only further SCOTUS desire to answer these questions, hopefully right after T45 replaces RBG or Breyer.
     

    Sirex

    Powered by natural gas
    Oct 30, 2010
    10,380
    Westminster, MD
    " Taken alone, Justice Scalia’s Heller opinion is enough to dispel this deception. In it, Justice Scalia made clear that the types of firearms protected by the Second Amendment include those “in common use at the time” for “lawful purposes like self-defense.” The AR-15, which is the favorite target of so-called “assault weapon” ban legislation, is the most popular rifle in America and therefore undoubtedly “in common use” and protected by the Second Amendment. "

    https://www.nraila.org/articles/201...dment-and-heller-prohibit-assault-weapon-bans
     

    rob

    DINO Extraordinaire
    Oct 11, 2010
    3,099
    Augusta, GA
    I really don't like the phrase "common use". It implies that they can ban a weapon before it is in common use. Once banned, it will never be in "common use".

    The Thompson submachine gun is one example. If it wasn't banned I bet it would be very common. Same goes for the M16, and other select fire variants of the ar-15. If they were not banned, the semi-auto only ar15 as we know it today would not exist.

    Rob


    Sent from my SM-T380 using Tapatalk
     

    2ndMDRebel

    Ultimate Member
    Feb 13, 2008
    2,466
    Couple that with SCOTUS just ruling 5-4 that the restrictions on church gatherings appears consistent with the 1A and is no different than restricting access to movie theaters, concerts, and sporting events. So when the Left declares a "pandemic of gun violence" and outright bans guns for the common good of the People the precedent has been set. Roberts needs to slip in the shower and break his neck.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,923
    Messages
    7,259,179
    Members
    33,349
    Latest member
    christian04

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom