On Tuesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit reversed a previous ruling which protected semiautomatic rifles from regulation – a serious blow for gun advocates who believe the Second Amendment protects such weapons from regulation.

The previous ruling came after Maryland passed a law in 2013, banning all semiautomatic rifles, including AR-15s and AK-47s. It also banned any form of copy of those firearms and large-capacity magazines.

As expected, gun advocates sued, pointing out the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to bear arms. Their claims were originally rejected by a district court, but the 4th Circuit later reversed that rejection. The Maryland law was ruled an infringement on gun owners’ Second Amendment rights.

The court then voted to rehear the case, which lead to Tuesday’s decision, and the demise of a ruling that protected our Second Amendment rights.

National Rifle Association spokeswoman Jennifer Baker said, “It is absurd to hold that the most popular rifle in America is not a protected `arm’ under the Second Amendment.” She added that the majority opinion “clearly ignores the Supreme Court’s guidance from District of Columbia v. Heller that the Second Amendment protects arms that are `in common use at the time for lawful purposes like self-defense.”‘

The NRA has estimated there are anywhere between 5 million to 10 million AR-15s in circulation in the U.S. all used for lawful purposes.

 

Like
Like Love Haha Wow Sad Angry

Image courtesy Flickr

  • 2A Supporter

    MOLON LABE

    • Ronald Berry

      Simply don’t comply. I don’t follow unconstitutional rulings.

  • renda blue

    Rat Bastards

  • Ranger

    What’s really sad and pathetic, while proving that the nation is a gathering of numbskulls, imbeciles,and zombies, is that the people actually think these “Judges” use the Constitution for Law.

    ALL DECISIONS, from the lowest level municipal court to the Supreme Court, are made in the best interest of political correctness! PERIOD! The Constipated Constitution nor any law, statute, regulation, or precedent gives any weight that would over rule of the political correctness decisions by these tyrants.

    A 3 year old child understands what “Shall Not Infringe” means. But, these judges aren’t three year olds. The only difference between the two is that one makes the decision based upon exactly what they Constitution says, and the other makes the decision based upon how much which campaign donor contributes to their campaign.

    The tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants and patriots alike, from time to time. Seems like a good watering is well called for.

    • keith

      Amen and Amen brother, keith

    • Inretrospect

      When a Plaintiff files a Complaint regarding 2nd Amendment Gun Rights, your Brief will be based on Constitutional Law, and past Case Histories ruled on by the Federal Appeals Courts and/or the Supreme Court.

      Unfortunately, the Judges in these Courts generally do not even read the Complaints, or make the Rulings… this is done by their Court Clerks.

    • Lorungee

      Also….The tree of Liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants, patriots and insurance companies, from time to time.

  • Mark Edwards

    AR-15s “in circulation”? Mine are safely secured when not in use..

    • Jimbo

      I don’t have 1. Gotta pump 12 mosburg 500 load with oo buck.

  • art frewin

    judges are not suppose to be political. or that stupid. shall not be infringed. i wonder what part of that statement they don’t understand. no logic and certainly no morels. they cannot change the constitution and are suppose to up hold it. since they are not upholding it i guess they need to go.

  • Millennium

    We should start mass carrying fully loaded. And let the local PD’s know what is going on and offer them an option… Stand with us….or be disarmed by us.

  • ray jones

    now we know who needs to be removed from the bench.

  • Benny Hill

    Always better to have a gun and not need it than to need a gun and not have it.

  • William Zabel

    Its been said that we will never need the Second Amendment until they try to take it away. I guess we may be getting close to that time.

  • f16hoser

    AN Armed Society is a Polite Society. TPTB don’t want us to be polite. No debt if we live in harmony.

  • Deborah Tucker

    I use a semi-automatic to hunt with. While only one shot is needed, sometimes things happen and a single shot is not enough and reloading won’t be fast enough

  • Raffie

    A gun is like insurance.
    You never want to use it, but you THANK GOD you have it when you need it.

    • richard from willow springs

      it’s like having a fire extinguisher in your house;
      if you need it, you need it NOW.

  • Lorungee

    So this means that a court is the law of the land and not the constitution.

    • grimriffer

      Nope. Theirs is just an opinion, nothing more.

    • Jimbo

      No only that jurisdiction. Don’t mess with texas

  • Kimberwarrior45

    Where did “weapons of war” get added to the Second Amendment? SO the “Judges” need a lesson on definitions our Founders would be using well here it is-
    Definitions from the 1828 Webster Dictionary
    “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
    A-An adjective, commonly called the indefinite article, and signifying one or any, but less emphatically.
    well-Suitably to one’s condition, to the occasion, or to a proposed end or use; suitably; abundantly; fully; adequately; thoroughly
    regulated- Adjusted by rule, method or forms; put in good order; subjected to rules or restrictions
    Militia- In the widest sense, the whole military force of a nation, including both those engaged in military service as a business, and those competent and available for such service; specifically, the body of citizens enrolled for military instruction and discipline, but not subject to be called into actual service except in emergencies.
    being- Since; inasmuch as
    necessary-Such as must be; impossible to be otherwise; not to be avoided; inevitable
    to- The preposition to primarily indicates approach and arrival, motion made in the direction of a place or thing and attaining it, access; and also, motion or tendency without arrival; movement toward
    the- A word placed before nouns to limit or individualize their meaning
    security-The condition or quality of being secure; secureness. Specifically: (a) Freedom from apprehension, anxiety, or care; confidence of power of safety; hence, assurance; certainty.
    of- In a general sense, from, or out from; proceeding from; belonging to; relating to; concerning;
    a- (see above definition)
    free- Exempt from subjection to the will of others; not under restraint, control, or compulsion; able to follow one’s own impulses, desires, or inclinations; determining one’s own course of action; not dependent; at liberty.
    State-The circumstances or condition of a being or thing at any given time.,
    the- (see above definition)
    right- Conformed to the constitution of man and the will of God, or to justice and equity; not deviating from the true and just; according with truth and duty; just; true.
    of- (see above definition)
    the- (see above definition)
    people- The body of persons who compose a community, tribe, nation, or race; an aggregate of individuals forming a whole; a community; a nation
    to- (see above definition)
    keep- To hold; to restrain from departure or removal; not to let go of; to retain in one’s power or possession; not to lose; to retain; to detain.
    and- A particle which expresses the relation of connection or addition. It is used to conjoin a word with a word, a clause with a clause, or a sentence with a sentence.
    bear- To possess or carry, as a mark of authority or distinction; to wear; as, to bear a sword, badge, or name
    Arms-, Instruments or weapons of offense or defense.
    shall- To owe; to be under obligation for
    not- A word used to express negation, prohibition, denial, or refusal.
    be- To exist actually, or in the world of fact; to have existence
    infringed- Broken; violated; transgresses.

    Webster’s 1828 Dictionary contains the foundation of America’s heritage and principal beliefs. It is contemporary with the American Constitution.
    It is an excellent reference for classical literature, Bible studies, history papers, and the ground work of explanation and reasoning for America’s national documents.

    • Nick

      Except that militia has a definition in State statutes. The Constitution only recognizes the authority of militia, it does not establish it. The congress only has the authority to write training so that it would be uniform across the states.

      • Kimberwarrior45

        This is what the dictionary said about Militia:
        Militia- In the widest sense, the whole military force of a nation, including both those engaged in military service as a business, and those competent and available for such service; specifically, the body of citizens enrolled for military instruction and discipline, but not subject to be called into actual service except in emergencies.

        What were the State’s Militias have become the “National Guard”. which is an entirely different arguement

      • Nick

        Again, the dictionary does not superseded state statutes.
        The National Guard is formed under Article 1, Section 10, Clause 3, and is not militia. You cannot change the definitions in the Constitution without an amendment. The court has already opined that the National Guard is part of the army and the governor can do nothing about that. Rudy Pietrich v DOD.

      • dan from ohio

        I suggest you read who and what the militia is,read The Militia Act (dick act) of 1903,we the people are the militia

      • Michael Sievers

        The right to keep and bear arms is the PEOPLES, so we may have a militia.

      • L O

        Webster is a liberal.

      • Tim Clark

        Lol!

      • Whiskey7Actual

        Bunch of Bravo Sierra!

  • Arthur

    1 branch of government does not hold the power to remove the protections of amendments to the constitution. The federal courts are 1 part of a branch of the federal government. I will not abide nor adhere to illegal use of the bench to legislate laws upon my constitutional rights. If all 3 branches vote and make it law then that will be the day that I adhere to that but not 1 rouge group of socialist parasites trying to take away all rights for all citizens guaranteed under the constitution. Time to take out the trash in America and it starts with the liberal run amok unconstitutional rulings from the benches in America. Term limits on all positions in government especially that of the legal branches are in deed needed.

    • Nick

      You clearly have no understanding of why the Founders incorporated the 2nd amendment.
      Read Article 1, Section 8, Clause 15&16. The 2nd was added so that there was no way that the right to keep and bear arms could be changed without a constitutional amendment and a complete breakdown of the intelligence level of the people.

      • Arthur

        Uh Nick, read above that is exactly what I just said but it’s ok if you have trouble understanding simple English. ~ start here If all 3 branches vote and make it law…

      • Nick

        Really? Is that how the amendment process works? There is a specific method for the amendment process, and it involves ratification by the states, not by the branches of government.
        Try reading Article 5, that is the only way the Constitution can be changed.

      • NewFedFAA

        Wrong Arthur.
        SO wrong.
        Is this what they teach now?

      • Rocket Doc

        hE IS RIGHT ABOUT ARTICLE 5. IT HAS TO BE VOTED ON BY THE STATES, AND IN A VOTE THAT TOPS 80%. iT CAN NEVER HAPPEN THE WAY IT IS SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN, BECAUSE THESE CORRUPT POLITICIANS, AND JUDGES KNOW IT, AND ARE TRYING TO SUBVERT OUR CONSTITUTION AND PERVERT THEIR OWN AGENDA…

  • grimriffer

    Does the phrase “go f#$% yourself” mean anything?

  • disqus_yU5rfSFNc3

    mmm i like to keep things simple. if you want them banned you’ll have to come and get them!!! i DARE you!!!!!!!!!

  • James Stamulis

    It is about time for congress to do their damned job and pass legislation that for once and all protects our rights to bear arms of all kinds the way our founders intended not the way some liberal activist wants it to be. We finally have conservative control of congress for the first time since the 1920’s and with Trump we have the best chance to finally get what should have.

    • Nick

      What legislation? The U.S. Constitution placed the authority “to execute the Laws of the Union” in the hands of the People as the militia.
      We don’t need new laws, we need people who will get their heads out of their butts and realize that they’ve been duped for decades by the likes of those in the NRA.
      There is only one place in law where you can find the word “necessary”, so why is it that the vast majority deny it like its the plague.
      Before you come back with the fallacy that the National Guard is militia you should read Article 1, Section 10, Clause 3, and Article 5 and understand that the meaning of the words in the Constitution cannot be changed without an amendment.

      • Rumplestiltskin

        Hey ass hole you had better hope that there is a NRA member around to help you when civil war breaks out. Personally this NRA member would let you rot in the hole you are hiding in.

      • Nick

        I’m a veteran, and I’m sure I can handle a dick like yourself since you want to talk like an idiot.
        I support the right of the People. What do you support? Where has the battle of the individual right gotten us. Close to 100 MILLION people are barred from owning certain weapons, and have restrictions on magazine capacity.

      • Phake Kneuze

        hey rumpleforeskin…go re read his post…you are on same side phukin putz

      • NewFedFAA

        It talks about a militia.
        Then it ends with: “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

        Very little wiggle room there.

  • Jimbo

    I have ar .22 ar .9mm ar shotgun,ar machete go figure. Someone breaks in they may git the ar ball bat.

  • Nick

    The problem is that the so-called pro-2nd community completely ignores the first 13 words of the amendment, Article 1, Section 8, Clause 15&16, Article 2, Section 2, and all the state statutes, upon which the 2nd was adopted.
    The NRA has been waging this battle on greed, and ignorance rather than the actual law. There is too much money involved in having convinced people that the sole purpose of the 2nd was to protect individuals than what was intended.
    In reading all that took place, and why Patrick Henry insisted on a Bill of Rights one can only draw the conclusion that the Founders wanted to make sure that the “Militia of the several States” would always remain in tact with the power “to execute the Laws of the Union”.
    For those out there who have been convinced by buffoons like LaPierre who lives a good life on memberships and contributions, you should know that the majority of the NRA board want nothing to do with the 2nd.
    Ask yourself what would happen if the ‘Sword’ was returned to the hands of the People as it was intended to remain? There would be absolutely no more gun control debate, crime would diminish, and corruption in the government would be dealt with by the lawful authority of the People.

    • Zaphod Braden

      There has never been a government that banned it’s own ARMED FORCES from “Keeping and Bearing” ARMS.

      Find one government in the history of humanity that felt a need to document a “RIGHT” for it’s ARMED FORCES to possess ARMS.
      Oppressive Governments are ALWAYS banning the People’S RIGHTS to arms.
      The claim that the Founding Fathers wrote the 2nd Amendment to give Our ARMED FORCES a “right” to keep and carry ARMS is S-T-U-P-I-D.

      • Nick

        What armed forces? Have you ever read the Constitution? There is a distinct difference between the army and Militia. There are literally hundreds of statutes showing the difference.
        Militia statutes read that every able-bodied man must maintain a rifle that is the same as a soldier.
        Article 1, Section 8, Clause 12 states “To raise and support armies”, while Article 1, Section 8, Clause 15&16 recognize that the state already has Militia and that the state appoints its own officers.
        This is throughout the Constitution as in Article 2, Section 2, Clause 1 “The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the Several States”.
        Militia is the People with all the authority “to execute the Laws of the Union”.
        There are literally hundreds of statutes, and articles on Militia that no one today wants to read because the vast majority can’t imagine that they know little to nothing on this topic and why the Founders incorporated the 2nd.

    • Rumplestiltskin

      Hey Mike are you some kind of troll? What part of the second amendment don’t you understand? Regardless of what is written in the body of the constitution the bill of right lays out what we the citizens have the right to do, as in; “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

      Any interpretation then is only done by those such as yourself who want to twist what the meaning of that amendment converys to serve your fears. I’ll bet you don’t own a gun and it is your fears are what are causing you act like an idiot. Maybe you should go spew you crap somewhere else.

      We conseder Wayne LaPierre right up there with Charlton Heston, patriots of the first order. OUT OF MY COLD DEAD HANDS YOU SOB!

      • Nick

        What happened to the first 13 words? Do they mean nothing at all? I quote the whole of the amendment any you quoted half of it. What validity does that have.
        Militia is all the People. All you need to do is look at the state statutes. There seems to be this mindset that the vast majority of the pretend pro-2nd community not only can’t understand, but absolutely refuse to. Militia is ALL THE PEOPLE.
        This is all laid out in the state statutes. I’m defending the 2nd, what are you defending? With all the People exercising as militia there can be absolutely no gun control as the statutes require that the People be armed in the same manner as a soldier.
        So the state statutes require that at least ALL-ABLE bodied men maintain a rifle equivalent to that of a soldier. ALL. ALL THE PEOPLE are MILITIA.

    • Rey d’Tutto

      The preamble denotes the necessity of an Armed Populace.
      The Militia is all Citizens capable of prosecuting warfare who are not in the Military (Army, Navy, Marines, National Guard).
      FOAD, Troll

      • Nick

        Yes!

    • Teknikid

      “The problem is that the so-called pro-2nd community completely ignores the first 13 words of the amendment,”

      “Well-regulated” does NOT mean well-restricted. No one is ignoring anything.

      “Ask yourself what would happen if the ‘Sword’ was returned to the hands of the People as it was intended to remain?”

      The “sword” was intended for the people at large. That question was settled over 200 years ago.

    • Chris in KY

      The word combination of “well regulated” at the time of the Constitution meant that people would keep and maintain their firearm and ammunition.

      The states responsibility was to make sure that said citizens were trained in the use of the weapon along with proper tactics that are in use at that given time.

      In the early days of the Republic men were required to muster with their weapons at various times. Some states even required proof of ownership and maintenance to vote i.e. bring your arms and required number of rounds.

  • Rule of Law

    Make the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit Judges come and try to collect them.

    The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed, except for semiautomatic rifles,

  • Rage Against THE MAN

    The PLAIN LANGUAGE of the Second Amendment is clear, unambiguous, and incontestable – i.e., …”the RIGHT of the PEOPLE to KEEP and BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!”

    The Fed-Coat Government is completely out-of-control,…running headlong toward the oppression of the British who sparked the American Revolution.

    Let the Second (Amendment) American Revolution begin! Molon Labe!

  • Zaphod Braden

    There has never been a government that banned it’s own ARMED FORCES from “Keeping and Bearing” ARMS.

    Find one government in the history of humanity that felt a need to document a “RIGHT” for it’s ARMED FORCES to possess ARMS.
    Oppressive Governments are ALWAYS banning the People’S RIGHTS to arms.
    The claim that the Founding Fathers wrote the 2nd Amendment to give Our ARMED FORCES a “right” to keep and carry ARMS is S-T-U-P-I-D.
    The only reason for the Second Amendment is to clearly spell-out the GOD GIVEN RIGHT of INDIVIDUALS to keep & bear ARMS.
    The only reason for the BILL(list) of RIGHTS was to codify INDIVIDUALS’ GOD GIVEN RIGHTS.
    Has there ever been a government that was not chock full of it’s “rights” up to and including declaring itself to be the Lord God Almighty?! (Rome, Egypt, Israel,etc)
    Does the 1st Amendment mean the GOVERNMENT is allowed to give speeches? Try shutting up any Politician. But THEY would LOVE to shut YOU up, hence the FIRST Amendment.
    Anyone who tells you the 2nd Amendment applies to the Army or State Militia, is telling you they think you are STUPID.
    There has NEVER been a government that felt it had to codify it’s army’s/soldier’s “RIGHT” to “Keep and BEAR ARMS” because there has NEVER been a government that refused to allow It’s own soldiers to KEEP and BEAR ARMS!
    The Second Amendment was given to the People, like all the other rights in the Bill or Rights. This was confirmed by the SCOTUS in the DC vs Heller decision, where they stated that the “People” in the Second Amendment were the same “People” that are mentioned in the First and Fourth Amendment.
    The 2nd Amendment clearly guarantees the “right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms”, and certainly not “the Militia”.
    Why would “the Militia”, a type of army manned by citizen-soldiers as opposed to full-time “regulars”, need a constitutional amendment to guarantee they have the right “to keep and bear arms”?
    Is there any specific statement anywhere in the Constitution that the army Congress is empowered to raise has the “right to keep and bear arms”?

    Of course not.

    That is assumed.

    It is implicit in the nature of all kinds of armies —- be they militia or regulars, volunteer, conscripted, or mercenary — to be armed.
    They are all “armed forces”.
    They all “bear arms”.
    They all carry guns.
    That is what they do.
    It certainly no more requires an amendment to the Constitution to state that “the Militia” has the RKBA , than a specific statement that the army Congress is empowered to raise may be manned by armed troops.

    “The [U.S.] Constitution is a limitation on the government, not on private individuals … it does not prescribe the conduct of private individuals, only the conduct of the government … it is not a charter for government power, but a charter of the citizen’s protection against the government.” Ayn Rand

    • DiMarco

      Upvote X320,000,000

  • Forearmed

    Eventually the NRA will have to say what now cannot be said. If the crooked court system believes they can take away our god given rights, then the citizenship of this nations can take away the rights of those judges.

    When 15 men and women can dictate what three hundred and twenty five million Americans can or cannot do it is time to change the system by whatever methods work the fastest.

    If the likes of John Roberts on the Supreme Court can be forced to change his opinion because he was compromised by the CIA/NSA, then our laws do not mean a thing and thus court rulings should be ignored.

    The lines of demarcation are being drawn, and the people may soon need to pick sides. If you are not on the side of the Gun-Rights Constitutionalist, then you may become a victim of police brutality as the state tries to force itself into every aspect of our lives. The war is coming. Which side will you choose?

    • King Lear

      The NRA is worthless. I unfortunately live in Kalifornia. The NRA was silent when the criminal piece of garbage Brown passed his restrictions on AR’s last July. Gun Owners of America represents gun owners better.

  • Kevsh

    The 2nd amendment was not specific of what type of arms. Everything thing of that period was was ball, and powder So with that
    knowledge, I would say the founding leaders meant any type of weapon. Wonder what the courts reason was for this, cause it definitely will not stop murders, mass shootings.

    • David McElroy

      Militia men were also required to supply their own rifles, which could rightly be called “military grade weapons”, and the law also allowed the personal ownership of cannon for household defense. Many of those cannon remained functional thru the War Between The States. Surely a cannon is a “military grade weapon”! We should have machine guns!

    • 2Zymos

      Reason? There is no “reason” anywhere near the current decision. Its PURPOSE: to remove your POWER and right to form the militia and remove the POWER through arms to exercise your right to have a government of tyranny and tyrants removed…
      …as is your right IAW the second para of the Declaration of Ind.
      … a right, even a duty, to throw of such governance and provide new guards for providing liberty, rights, protection of our rights from others who wish to take them or abuse them, and governance to foster domestic tranquility.

      • DiMarco

        Up vote X320,000,000.

  • Dexter

    The problem is we have a bunch of old ass liberal and democrats as judges and the old fools need to be retired permanently before they mess it up for all of us…

  • Phake Kneuze

    Ignore it.
    SCOTUS made s ruling years back….any weapon available to our military is legal to public…

    Today, you just need right tax stamps and you can have a M203 w/ HEFRAG rounds for your AR…

    • And your name on the governments “Hit first” list.

  • thomas jefferson

    OUR FATHER IN HEAVEN WARNED EVERYONE….YOUR government IS rotten to the core ,inside and out,top to bottom,they want your weapons because they know the days coming you’ll realize their the ones kidnapping your children,stealing your money,and trying to take your freedom away,READING IN BETWEEN THE LINES HERE ,means you need to stock up on 3/4 inch rope and get ready to use it,YOUR GOING TO HAVE TO TAKE YOUR COUNTRY BACK BY FORCE,they same way their stealing it from you……..

    • L. A. McDonough

      Along with guns of all types, knives, swords, baseball bats, pitchforks, axes, etc.

    • Rocket Doc

      THAT IS EXACTLY WHY THEY WANT YOUR WEAPONS…. SO YOU CANNOT FIGHT.
      WHEN GUNS ARE OUTLAWED, I WILL BE AN OUTLAW!!

  • Jasonn

    It’s because of Loony Lefty Judicial Contortionists like this that the outcome of the 2016 presidential election was so critical to the future of America. The price of Liberty is eternal vigilance.

  • endofwatchersbegan1/28/2011

    Maryland is a NAZI State, next to CA, WA, OR and NY. These Govts. need to be REMOVED.

  • Jay

    Throughout history most nations have fallen as a result of corrupt judges and the corruption of justice that they bring. Justice is what governments are built on and when justice is gone, so is the nation because it falls to anarchy.

  • tomnchrist

    Guess where an enemy invasion will occur.
    California, Washington and Oregon on the West coast,
    and Maryland, Maine, Massachusetts and Delaware on the East Coast.
    The 1st function of the Federal Government is to Protect the Country from invasion, and should require that at least Citizens living in Border States be Armed with at minimum semi-automatic weapons.
    Next question is; where do they import these judges from?

    • King Lear

      Enemy invasion? It’s already started…Chemtrails, GMO’s, and fluoride in the water. They will kill 90% of us without firing one shot. Georgia Guidestones spell out their plans.

  • Dan

    Tell the 9th circuit to get off there ass and come and take them..

    • Rocket Doc

      I AGREE.. I AM ARMED AND READY FOR THEM!! THEY BETTER BRING A SHIT LOAD OF BODY BAGS!

      • King Lear

        Them rat ba$tards have drones. The Gooberment used them on some ranchers in North Dakota a few years back. One hellfire missile and it’s lights out.

  • Falcon101

    As the corruption in this nation grows, so will the corrupt rulings by the corrupt judges and politicians of this country in an attempt to make us all incapable of defending ourselves as they have been bringing in illegals from all over the planet, they try to arm them and disarm us so we stand helpless in our own land while illegal foreigners trample us on our own soil.

    • L. A. McDonough

      It is now happening in the EU, which will soon be under shiria law enabled by the EU leaders pushing for globalism.

      • Robert

        Sharia, like diarrhea… hahaha! Them Turbines are a joke!

    • Rocket Doc

      THEN THERE WILL BE A BUNCH PF LIBERAL JUDGES DEAD, AND A WHOLE CRAP LOAD OF POLITICIANS WHO WILL BE FOUND COMMITTING “SUICIDE”… THEY DON’T HAVE THE BALLS, OR THE COURAGE TO WIN THE FIGHT WE WILL GIVE THEM!!!

  • DiMarco

    Molon labe….u fers…

  • Teknikid

    What does “large capacity” magazines mean? 30-round mags are STANDARD capacity.

    • Robert

      Large would be more than would be needed to smoke my barrel. And I have heat-sinks on mine.

      I would imagine that “large” would be ANYTHING more than THEY normally carry.

  • LF

    What part of shall not be infringed do they not understand?

    • Robert

      As I see it, is ZERO.

  • Nolan

    Most of the comments are too alarmist and absurd to be credible. Surely we don’t need weapons like this in every American household.

    • Edwinj3

      Each according to their need no? And just who decides “need”? You? The government? In a free country such a decision should clearly be up to the individual. The second Amendment shall not be infringed. If “we” do, look out – YOU’LL be losing something I decide YOU DON’T “NEED”. It never happens maroon until it happens to you right? Don’t bother responding.

      • Daanan Mahn

        🙂

      • Yeah, plus we will fight for it. In the neighborhoods of the congressmen in DC, I bet there are 100 armed constitutionalists in a 1/2 mile circle It would absolutely create an immediate civil war, and on the congressman’s home street.

      • Observant_One

        I would recommend a 1/2 mile semi-circle.

    • L. A. McDonough

      yes we do, you stupid liberal leftist idiot.

    • Robert

      I don’t need a model airplane with an 80″ wingspan that can go near 150 MPH, but I have them and I love them.

      How many pounds of steel, plastic, etc. do YOU need to transport your brain? What is the weight of your brain? A couple pounds ( maybe ounces) at best? Yet you USE MUCH MORE than that in machinery to transport that THING around!

      LOL – RETARD.

    • Chris in KY

      The purpose of the 2nd is to insure that the citizen’s of the country where armed as the well as the military of the common age.

      Being that modern armies arm their soldiers with true assault rifles(a.k.a. select fire capable of both semi-automatic fire and full-auto or burst fire) and belt feed machine guns. We the people should be able to possess those same arms without governmental regulation or oversight.

      • Absolutely. We should carry the same exact combat load. I also watched a fascinating DVD by some constitutional lawyers who said that the federal government is even obligated to PAY for our weapons, and that if the fed refused, the states were to fund the purchase and bill the federal gvt for them. It was really interesting.

      • chuck2

        Exacty where is that stated…you guard house Constitution lawyers are amusing at best, very paranoid at worst. Better to spend time getting your GED then play at being lawyers.

    • Keith Brennan

      You don’t need them, hope it works out for you.

      • zipper

        He has his water pistol; he’s happy & secure.

    • jerrytbg

      “Surely we don’t need weapons like this in every American household.”

      It was the very purpose of the 2ND in the Bill Of Rights…

    • Rocket Doc

      WHO THE HELL ASKED FOR YOUR “JUDGMENT”:… YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO SAY WHO HAS WHAT. IF YOU DO, THEN, I HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO TAKE EVERYTHING YOU HAVE, BECAUSE I DON’T THINK YOU NEED IT!!! SHUT YOUR STUPID PIE HOLE!!! YOU HAVE NO COMMON SENSE, NOR THE CAPACITY TO HOLD ONE…
      COME AND TAKE IT!!!!! I DARE YOU!!!

      • King Lear

        Nolan is a butt hurt Hillary voter.

    • Yes we do. We need weapons like this in every rational-minded conservative bible-believing constitution-supporting household. None for the left, certainly.

    • King Lear

      Weapons for the citizenry should be on the same level as the police and military.

      • Chiefbuck

        Better give that comment a tune up, I served for 28 years and believe me we have some weapons that the public has no need for.

    • Michael Sievers

      As the second amendment is there to safeguard are right of protection from an unruly government, I should be able to own any weapon of my choice up to and including any weapon the government owns. The playing field must be even, or tilted in favor of the individual, not the government. Remember, when a government no longer has the consent of the governed, we have the right to abolish that government.

      • zipper

        Yeah man, I always wanted a Phalanx.

      • chuck2

        Hmmm and Hillary won popular vote, so much for you predicted fun and games… and just who is to say, to dictate the government no longer has consent? You are a little vague there, as your post would fall under terrorist type law.

      • Ock

        The jury is still out on that…. She did collect two million more individual ballots. But with all the dead, illegal aliens, and repeated acorn voters, not to mention all the absentee ballots from overseas being tossed out several times, the “popular vote” isn’t as accurate as it should be. Also, since we are a republic and not a democracy our process gives power to the smaller populated areas in the form of electoral votes, so that the country isn’t run by a few but very large populations! Such as LA, NY, Chi…. It has always been that way. Never have you seen it different. BTW: the Constitution isn’t vague-read it, over and over

    • 92nRed Rappini

      Nolan, you would be surprised at how many of us do.

    • zipper

      And You don’t need two cars, 3 meals a day, a closet full of clothes, a home over 600 sq ft, etc, etc. Fool.

    • zipper

      You lost any semblance of being credible yourself with that “absurd” comment.

    • chuck2

      Pointless to discuss how dangerously threatening many of the posts have become.. and how just plain stupid. But that element is always there.. in military we often called such “experts”, Guardhouse lawyers, and using any form of logic to argue, is 100% ignored, but suspect some could get some jail time, and should for their threats.. bullies all as civility and logic or rational thought, is not their ilk… as the posts provide.. am pretty sure this post will be attacked by such.. Just got to live with facts the nra lemmings and intolerance’s, however ignorant, have right to say as they do.. but the threats, usual bully or terrorists tactics, are another whole different game..however stupid they are.

      • Ock

        You are correct about one thing, it is pointless to discuss with you. Just a fact, not an attack so relax. You are entitled to your opinion.

    • Chiefbuck

      If liberals control the citizens we will absolutely need firearms of many varieties. Hopefully one day it will be understood that liberalism is the first cousin of communism. Crime will run rampant if firearms are restricted to free people because then only criminals will be armed.

    • Ock

      Speak for yourself. If you don’t want to have one you don’t have to. But, that doesn’t give you or the “Deep State” the right to infringe on my second amendment rights. I might need firearms like this to protect me and my family and property. What if no matter how much I practice I just don’t get very good at my aim? What if I’m disabled and reloading is a problem for me? What if my family members have no idea how to operate a firearm (just an example-not true-they know very well) and I wind up shooting for four?

  • dan from ohio

    16 Am Jur 2d,Sec 177 late 2 Sec 256d states,the general rule is that an unconstitional statute,though having the form and name of law,is in reality no law,but is wholly void,and ineffective for any purpose;since unconstitionality dates from the time of its enactment,and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it.NO ONE is bound to obey an unconstitional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.

    • Firinn

      For more reading fun, check out the Application for Naturalization, Form N-400.

      You know how Lefts always try to define what a “militia” really means?

      Well, there is a part on the Application where the applicant has to answer whether they have participated in any of “following groups.”

      “H. Militia (an army of people, not part of the official military)?”

      Even our government knows that a militia is an “army of people, not part of the official military.” 😉

      **Oh, and this was during Obama’s years in office and still to this day.

  • Goddidntcallutoaplayground

    Corts don’t make law ,,, according to the Constitution just saying,, message to the Illuminati molon labe..

  • B. E. T.

    Courts don’t make law. Tell the court “Thank you for your opinion. Now go play in they highway!!!”

  • Keith Brennan

    They can take my gun, but they will get the bullets first!

  • Keith Brennan

    “Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurrences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that’s good.”
    George Washington
    First President of the United States

    • King Lear

      Without the Second, there can be no First.

  • James Grubbs

    It appears that otherwise law-biding citizens will, unconstitutionally, become criminals overnight. Nothing new to those who understand that they were born slaves and the real criminals are running the gruberment.

    • zipper

      They’ll take the confiscated guns and give them to the poor, deprived Illegals & “refugees.” Just like Holder did in Fast & Furious.

  • Mike Tesch

    Just think where we’d be if crooked Hillary was picking the next SCOTUS Judge.
    This would be a great time for Congress to exercise their Constitutional authority over the courts and impeach some of these lawless judges. It is time to clean house.

    • Dan Hardesty

      But we know they wouldn’t. Sad, they value their own money and power more than their Liberty, Freedom, and sworn duty to follow the US Constitution.

    • zipper

      OUR Congress?? Yeah, they did a “great” job of opposing Barry’s anti-American agenda when they could, didn’t they?
      You forget who’s in Congress; nest of vermin.

  • Christian Gains

    In the CLEARLY toxic atmosphere of LEFTIST “legislating Judges”, and the incredibly STUPID thinking that LIBERALS adhere to, it’s a WONDER that we’ve been able to maintain our 2nd Amendment RIGHTS for this long!

    TPTB & the “DEEP STATE” dearly HATE the mere THOUGHT of an armed populace…so, we’re seeing the FULL COURT, (pun intended), PRESS, (PUN INTENDED), towards outlawing ANY guns…REGARDLESS of WHO is in the W.H., OR SCOTUS! (An argument can be made that, Judge Scalia met with an untimely death, due to his LACK of yieldedness to certain “powers” & “principalities”)…It’s becoming more obvious that “TPTB” NEED a CIVIL WAR to breakout, thereby, giving their cronies cause to declare M.L.!

    There’s a TREMENDOUSLY PERTINENT verse in the Bible: “The PRUDENT man forseeth the evil thereof, and hideth himself, BUT! The simple pass on, and are punished”! [Prov.22: 3]…”He that hath ears, let him hear…”

  • The Crow ✓ᴴᵘᵍᶦᶰᶰ

    Come and take them from my cold dead hands.

    • Beppie

      Your hands will not be cold and dead if your aim is true.

  • kevin B

    “WOW” look’s like Nolan got quit popular , stupid,stupid man !

  • James Rooster Pace

    Time to put these judges down that violate Constitutional rights.

  • King Lear

    It’s almost time to put those 300 million firearms to good use.

  • barry oldwater

    Stupid liberals

    • Observant_One

      That’s the only type of liberal in existence.

  • CTMCSTCSFA

    10 round magazine restriction fine THAT’S ALL MY GRANDPARENTS HAD IN WORLD WAR 2 the M1(US main weapon), K98 (german), Mosin Nagant 91/30 (Russian), and Arasaka 99 (Japanese) all were only 10 round capacity and look what they accomplished. Oh and the magazines were FIXED and top loaded from stripper clips.

    • Perry Smith

      People ask why I need 30 rounds the hunt. I don’t. I only need one round to hunt. The other 29 are too keep your gun grabbing liberty stealing asses in line.

      • zipper

        Bust their stupidity with this: “So, your car holds 20 gallons of gas which gives you 500 miles range? But, you only commute to work 16 miles/day. WHY do you need a car with so much CAPACITY?!
        Take a photo of the stupid, blank look on their face.

    • Rick

      I agree. 30 re magazines and black furniture make zero difference. So why do you care if someone has it?

      • L O

        Choice… I choose 30 round mags, why do you support people who want me to own less?

    • Dan Hardesty

      You speak truth of that time, but consider the other factors. How many were firing those 10 rounds at the same time? Artillery and air backup? Homeowners don’t have that option, and neither did people in places like Kosovo, Baltimore, or South Los Angeles. And what of the new restrictions after this? More than couple big cities banned anything with more than 7 round capabilities. They had to change it when they realized LEOs would be in violation. Australia doesn’t allow more than 5 in most rifles now, according to my Mate down there. The “black guns” are usually easier to carry and fire or women, children, and people with disabilities. Many things to consider before speaking, yes?

    • L O

      Liberal Logic: if they will accept 10 rnd mags, surly they will accept 5 rnd mags.. and if they accept 5 rnd mags we can get them to agree on single shot.

      • zipper

        Whatever the bad guys can get their hands on is what they’ll use. Had a SA Ruger Blkhwk stolen. It was recovered a year later from a busted drug dealer! The stupid anti-gunners’ REAL goal is to ban ALL firearms, thinking it will stop murders, suicides, and crime.
        Just look at what’s happening in our streets now. All those “peaceful protests” by the same morons who want all the guns destroyed. See a contradiction there?

      • Chiefbuck

        In areas which permit relaxed gun regulations the residents are far safer than firearms prohibited states. The problems with firearms is that the gun laws on the books are not enforced. Liberal areas that refuse to allow stop and frisk are why there are so many firearm caused incidents.

      • zipper

        Also, with the current hysteria & “protests” from all the Communist-led groups, the cops are afraid to go after the “oppressed” minorities perpetrating all the violence. Under Trump, that should change(I hope).

      • Observant_One

        The real purpose of picking up all the guns is to convert free citizens into easily controlled serfs to make it easier for the new world order takeover of your existence.

      • zipper

        Of course.

    • Chiefbuck

      The Mauser 98 the Mosin Nagant, and Japanese Arisaka 99 were five round capacity stripper clip fed internal box magazine rifles, The M1 rifle had an 8 round clip. The Arisaka 99 was a fine weapon and has been underrated by many. It had a chrome bore and a very strong action. The (Mauser 98) is a bolt action rifle and is the standard bolt action rifle which all bolt action rifles have borrowed the design from.The US paid royalties for basing the design for the great US model 1903 of WWI and later fame.

  • RO

    I saw Rambo do a pretty good job with a compound bow. Quieter too.

  • William

    In the People’s Republic of Kalifornia it’s even worse. Governor Moonbeam and the States Legislature passed a law the any weapon “that has the capacity to have a magazine in excess of 10 rounds” is illegal to own and is now a felony to possess starting January 2018.

    So this means you now can legally possess a knife as any 6 round revolver, single shot or double barrell shotgun could be converted to take a magazine of more than 10 rounds.

    Bet some avid Kalifornian engineer is already in the design stage creating Gatling gun type bow & arrows as well as those deadly sling shots.

  • Darrin Bailey

    the new world order wont rest until we have no FIREARM rights..barack repeatedly lied and this is what they left is sooo good at…lying and manipkating stats to serve them…our country is still headed in a wring direction, I would nt doubt if they try to impeach Trump and put the dictator barack back in power…they are fools..

  • TimeHasCome

    Please put the ban on . The AR15 will go from $700 to $7,000 . Look around the only people left trying to obey laws are gun owners . From illegal drugs and illegal immigration nobody obeys laws anyone .

  • buffalobob826

    These judges have probably been paid off for there ruling. Check there bank accounts to see if anything has recently changed.

    • zipper

      Either that, or they’re Progressive-Liberals installed just for that reason. Look at the problem Obama created on the SCOTUS with the appointment of Liberal judges.
      After Gorsuch, is confirmed, and that deranged hag Ginsburg retires, Trump will get another pick. Then there will be a Conservative majority and we’ll be on better ground.

  • L O

    Its like shutting the barn door after all the horses ran off..Americans simply will not comply..

  • Marty Johnson

    The 4th Circuit has invented their law, now let them enforce it. Good luck taking a few million guns away you fat, political hacks with law degrees.

  • Leah D. Lichtenberg

    Whomever that judge is isn’t a shooter. Someone needs to take that idiot and teach him the correct ways, rules, etc. of shooting a rife. How much you want to bet he will enjoy it and the law will be changed. I’ll put money on it.

    • zipper

      Had an English girlfriend who came over for a visit. When she found out
      I was a shooter, she nearly died on the spot! (should’ve seen the look
      on her face) Starts to rail about guns, dangerous, etc; the usual BS. I
      just sat there and let her go on. Finally, she when finished, I simply
      said, “Tomorrow, we’re going shooting.”
      Well, after some proper
      operational & safety instruction, I let her have at it with a
      bolt-action .22lr rifle. She made me take numerous photos of her
      holding the shot targets and gun, with a Big smile on her face.
      Driving home she says to me, “When can we go again?!”

      • emptymag

        Zipper…It’s NOT about target practice.

      • zipper

        You missed it. I was responding to Leah’s remark about the judge probably not being a shooter, and would likely change his mind if he tried it. I shared my own experience with just that point.

  • Buddy Clark

    It comes down to this folks.The 2nd Amendment shall not be infringed.when they pass illegal laws on law abiding citizens,those citizens shall not obey unconstitutional laws 1776 is bearing down on us again.

  • Bang Stick

    Ideology trumps reading comprehension.

    How is it that individuals have owned firearms since before we were a country yet somehow in last 20 years it is suddenly not an individual Right?

    • Redpenmaster

      The left wants to freeze time and only allow the law abiding to own arms with old technology. Meanwhile, everyone else gets the latest upgrades. It’s crazy.

  • Jakob Stagg

    This precisely why the Second Amendment exists.

  • sick and tired of the dictator

    its simple do not obey unconstitutional orders.the power is the people.come and take um mother f++ckers we the people are the constitution.

  • watchdogman

    Infringement…

  • Walter Sobchak

    The FED-Coats are not only coming,…they have infested Washington’s, District of Criminals and many communist leaning states (e.g., CA, MA, MD, IL, NY, …. et. al. anti-Second Amendment, anti- freedom and liberty states.). Period. Let the Second (Amendment) American Revolution begin! Molon Labe.

  • Kamehameha the less

    I have twin 50’s fully auto mofo judges, I’ll shred

  • Alleged Comment

    The 2nd Amendment only has to deal with the creation of a MILITIA and has no other bearings on owning weapons outside the scope of a MILITIA.

    The court has violated an unalienable right from your creator as well as the 2nd Amendment they VOWED to uphold which gives citizen the right to bear arms and not BARE arms to secure a free state.

    In this instance the court has committed treason and a violation of their sacred oaths. The judges need to be recalled and removed.

  • Ernie “glad 2 c u” M

    Why was my Michael Moore comment removed? Must have struck a liberal progressive nerve.

  • h2s

    18 U.S. Code § 242 – Deprivation of rights under color of law

    Current through Pub. L. 114-38. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.)
    US Code
    Notes
    prev | next
    Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.