|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
Federal Court: Semi-autos 'indistinguishable' from M-16s
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
A federal judge this week upheld California’s ban on many popular semi-auto firearms, saying they were “essentially indistinguishable from M-16s.”
The order, in a case brought by several gun owners in 2017 seeking to declare California’s “assault weapon” ban unconstitutional, saw U.S. District Judge Josephine Staton side with the state’s point of view. Staton, extensively citing briefs in the case from anti-gun groups such as the Brady Center, Everytown and Giffords, found that semi-autos banned either by name or cosmetic features such as collapsible stocks or muzzle brakes were basically military-grade hardware. |
| Comment by:
MarkHamTownsend
(7/26/2019)
|
So now they're conflating semi auto with full auto.
Despite the fact that a ordinary peon being caught with a full auto M4 is subject to a 10 year prison term and a mega-thousand dollar fine, by the government, the GOVERNMENT now says my semi auto M4orgery is ....."military grade."
They're pissing down our legs and telling us it's raining.
MOLON LABE.
|
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| There are other things so clearly out of the power of Congress, that the bare recital of them is sufficient, I mean the "...rights of bearing arms for defence, or for killing game..." These things seem to have been inserted among their objections, merely to induce the ignorant to believe that Congress would have a power over such objects and to infer from their being refused a place in the Constitution, their intention to exercise that power to the oppression of the people. —ALEXANDER WHITE (1787) |
|
|
