Federal Court rules law against making serialized gun unconstitutional

[Garet Jax]

I am unsure what is actually a "reasonable" restriction, ....

Along the same lines as yelling "Fire" in a movie theater. I would say:

1) Discharging a firearm in any location (other than a range or similar) when life threatening circumstances don't exist.
2) Owning a nuke.
3) Using a firearm to coerce someone when life threatening circumstances don't exist.

 

[TheOriginalMexicanBob]

One has the absolute right to yell "Fire!" in a movie theater. What goes unsaid is to exercise that right means one has to accept the consequences and penalties for such. Responsibility goes with every right.

 

[babalou]

One has the absolute right to yell "Fire!" in a movie theater. What goes unsaid is to exercise that right means one has to accept the consequences and penalties for such. Responsibility goes with every right.

this right here.

 

[Doctor_M]

…of MD residents that complied with serialization.

Boy... sure am glad that I'm not one of those guys.

 

[Alan3413]

Along the same lines as yelling "Fire" in a movie theater. I would say:

1) Discharging a firearm in any location (other than a range or similar) when life threatening circumstances don't exist.
2) Owning a nuke.
3) Using a firearm to coerce someone when life threatening circumstances don't exist.

Why is simple ownership of a nuke unconstitutional?

 

[KIBarrister]

Why is simple ownership of a nuke unconstitutional?

Agreed. The American birthright includes recreational McNukes (TM) for any who want and can afford them. At the founding, the most advanced military weapons were owned by private individuals.

 

[Bertfish]

Agreed. The American birthright includes recreational McNukes (TM) for any who want and can afford them. At the founding, the most advanced military weapons were owned by private individuals.

McNuke is what happens after you eat a McRib

 

[Occam]

Why is simple ownership of a nuke unconstitutional?

Likely argument(s) would go like this:

A nuke isn’t an infantry/militia weapon. You probably wouldn’t think of it as an “arm,” as you might a grenade launcher, etc.

It’s a device that, arguably (and utterly unlike a firearm) actually DOES require extraordinarily specialized skill and resources to even store safely, with the consequences of failing to do so being enormous. Having one in casual possession (unlike a firearm) could be seen as reckless endangerment of everyone for miles around. It’s a particularly bad example when arguing about the 2A. Cannons are a better fit.

 

[SWO Daddy]

Along the same lines as yelling "Fire" in a movie theater. I would say:

1) Discharging a firearm in any location (other than a range or similar) when life threatening circumstances don't exist.
2) Owning a nuke.
3) Using a firearm to coerce someone when life threatening circumstances don't exist.

Oh boy. Lots of things wrong here. Look up the court case where "yelling fire in a movie theater" originates from.

 

[Garet Jax]

Why is simple ownership of a nuke unconstitutional?

Seems to me that something capable of starting WW3 should not be generally available.

 

[Garet Jax]

Oh boy. Lots of things wrong here. Look up the court case where "yelling fire in a movie theater" originates from.

Educate me and help me understand the wrongness.

 

[Matlack]

Along the same lines as yelling "Fire" in a movie theater. I would say:

1) Discharging a firearm in any location (other than a range or similar) when life threatening circumstances don't exist.
2) Owning a nuke.
3) Using a firearm to coerce someone when life threatening circumstances don't exist.

Incorrect. It is perfectly legal to yell fire in a crowded theater if no one is injured, including the theater, by your actions. This is a false example created to imply "reasonable" exist. The limits on any right is if you infringe on another right. The best example is freedom of speech in which you may not defame someone. For 2a you cannot commit murder. This was the intention of our founding fathers.

 

[SWO Daddy]

Educate me and help me understand the wrongness.

It originates from an overturned court case where someone was arrested for passing out pamphlets protesting WW1.

 

[Garet Jax]

Incorrect. It is perfectly legal to yell fire in a crowded theater if no one is injured, including the theater, by your actions. This is a false example created to imply "reasonable" exist. The limits on any right is if you infringe on another right. The best example is freedom of speech in which you may not defame someone. For 2a you cannot commit murder. This was the intention of our founding fathers.

OK - so do you think someone should be able to discharge their firearms at any time in any direction as long as they don't hurt anyone?

 

[safegunners]

Federal Court Rules: Federal Law Making Serialized Guns a Crime Unconstitutional

On October 12, 2022, a federal district court in West Virginia ruled that a federal law that makes it a crime to possess a firearm with an altered, obliterated or removed serial number is unconstitutional under prohibition contained in the Second Amendment.

jpfo.org

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

My question is how do we get these federal rulings to have legal standing in Maryland. Is there a summary lawsuit you can file to have similar Maryland laws be ruled unconstitutional?

 

[swinokur]

There need to be circuit conflicts that send this to SCOTUS


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Bertfish]

My question is how do we get these federal rulings to have legal standing in Maryland. Is there a summary lawsuit you can file to have similar Maryland laws be ruled unconstitutional?

Get them to the correct court of appeals or SCOTUS

 

[safegunners]

There need to be circuit conflicts that send this to SCOTUS


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ok, did some googling .... when two circuit courts have differing opinions its called a "circuit split".

 

[Occam]

Seems to me that something capable of starting WW3 should not be generally available.

One could argue that WWI was started by a guy with a pistol.

 

[Doctor_M]

One could argue that WWI was started by a guy with a pistol.

Specifically an FN 1910.... clearly a weapon of war!