Other State Oblitered serial number charges found unconstitutional!

[brw2]

You know what else wasn't illegal for "civilians" to own and use back then? Cannons. BIG Cannons.

 

[The Heretic]

You know what else wasn't illegal for "civilians" to own and use back then? Cannons. BIG Cannons.

And grenades: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grenade#History

And suppressors: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silencer_(firearms)#History

A LOT of other stuff wasn't illegal in our history until 1934 (NFA).

 

[Bobbygun]

You know what else wasn't illegal for "civilians" to own and use back then? Cannons. BIG Cannons.

C'mon maaaaan! What good is a cannon against F-15s and NUKES?

 

[Stomper]

I get where you're going with that. I suppose (playing the devil's advocate) one could surmise that the script could be flipped back on firearm owners by saying that since certain items did not exist back in 1791, they wouldn't be covered by the 2A and can be legally infringed upon....Way too much lawyer-ese for a chit-kicker like me to figure out, but I do think the law works in mysterious ways.

Couple things off the top of my that didn't exist in 1791:
Semi-auto firearms
Primer fired cartridges
Magazines (as mentioned before)
Laser sights/Red Dots
Suppressors

That's covered by "common use", and "military use"….. there wasn't radio, TV, microphones and speakers, the internet, SATCOM, cell phones, and there were(relatively speaking) very few printed newspapers back then either…. all unquestionably covered by the 1A.

C'mon maaaaan! What good is a cannon against F-15s and NUKES?

The Vietcong and Taliban are still there to this day…. besides, you hit the supply line, production infrastructure, and make life a living hell for the workers that operate it all…. since we're already here and don't have to "swim over" to do it.

 

[Bobbygun]

The Vietcong and Taliban are still there to this day

(Still channeling my inner Joementia): "That's only cuz we didn't nuke 'em ----- YET!"

Maybe that will be Joe's October Surprise? (Shudder)

 

[Bobbygun]

all unquestioned covered by the 1A.

In an era where we question a SCOTUS candidate if she can tell us what a woman is, I really don't think there is ANYTHING that is "unquestioned". How the heck did we get here?

 

[Stomper]

In an era where we question a SCOTUS candidate if she can tell us what a woman is, I really don't think there is ANYTHING that is "unquestioned". How the heck did we get here?

Easily answered with one word…. "tolerance".

 

[The Heretic]

You know what else wasn't illegal for "civilians" to own and use back then? Cannons. BIG Cannons.

 

[rdb241]

Following Supreme Court’s Lead, Judge Finds Right to Remove Serial Numbers From Guns

 

[User 1234]

Thread title is inaccurate. A trial court judge in West Virginia ruled that under Bruen a ban on possession of a gun without a serial number could not stand.

 

[kmk1012]

Conspiracy theory here but, all these recent victories could be used to get congress to act on a permanent alteration or revoking of the 2nd Amendment. Why the hell else would we be winning all of these all of a sudden?

 

[WWShooter]

Conspiracy theory here but, all these recent victories could be used to get congress to act on a permanent alteration or revoking of the 2nd Amendment. Why the hell else would we be winning all of these all of a sudden?

Congress can't repeal the 2A, it takes a Constitutional amendment.

 

[rdb241]

Thread title is inaccurate. A trial court judge in West Virginia ruled that under Bruen a ban on possession of a gun without a serial number could not stand.

I was going by the article

 

[bradsteen]

Congress can't repeal the 2A, it takes a Constitutional amendment.

Regarding amendments...

An amendment may be proposed by a two-thirds vote of both Houses of Congress, or, if two-thirds of the States request one, by a convention called for that purpose. The amendment must then be ratified by three-fourths of the State legislatures, or three-fourths of conventions called in each State for ratification.

 

[edzz]

I was going by the article

An opinion piece in Slate? Must be the truth.

 

[po18guy]

Eyebrow raising. Cuts both ways though.

 

[RobMa]

Another One Bites The Dust | The Zelman Partisans

 

[ilikegunspdx]

Does this mean it is now legal to have a gun with an obliterated serial number? The section of the law dealing with this was found to be unconstitutional as I understand it.

 

[Yarome]

Does this mean it is now legal to have a gun with an obliterated serial number? The section of the law dealing with this was found to be unconstitutional as I understand it.

No... but kinda. That particualar case currently only applies to that case within that particular district, but the implications are potentially far reaching now that there is case law. However, it won't matter much until/unless it moves up into the higher courts... and won't prevent most anyone else from being charged for possession of a firearm with a defaced serial number... which is "technically" still illegal.

It simply means that there is a high likelihood that a person could beat the charge under the new standard SCOTUS laid out.... is my read on it, anyway.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

Not sure I understand that. A federal law, which applies to the whole nation, was found to be unconstitutional by a federal judge, but it is only unconstitutional in his district? Seems odd. Seems to me if it's found unconstitutional then the agency should have to remove it.

Anyway, the new OR law permit mongers would have a hard time if this were legal.