Washington Semiautomatic assault weapons represent a significant technological change - they allowa shooter to fire as fast as they can pull the trigger, ....

[RX-79G]

1. Restrictions on dangerous and unusual arms, yes. Outright banning those in common use such as those in question, no. Both Heller and Bruen stated this unequivocally.

2. No "addition" as you have termed them is inherently dangerous or unusual, neither are they firearms, so cannot be banned.

Finally, regulating firearms is one thing - and was the point of the "regulation" commentary in both Heller and Bruen - not outright banning them. The idea was, and still is in both cases, to introduce methods of screening out possession of those who shouldn't possess firearms. Heller outright lists both felons and the mentally ill as the two categories of persons who cannot possess firearms, therefore must be regulated from possession. The remaining categories of citizens within the age limitations (again, a regulation and not a ban) retain their right to access and possession of weapons that are not deemed dangerous and unusual.

Historically, types of weapons were also prohibited.


And the common use isn't unequivocal - it's unclear when that refers to.


I'm not defending the law but pointing out what sort of problems the plaintiffs have.

 

[CamoDeafie]

Following Bruen, historical analogies up to 1791 are allowed. I do not know of any nationwide nor Statewide Prohibition of types of weapons from the common people that existed then.

Following NSSF(National Shooting Sports Foundation) ; there are over 24 million Modern Sporting Rifles imported or manufactured by FFLs/companies in the US from 1992 to 2020ish; this is not just ARs but also AKs and similar. This does not include AR/AK based pistols, nor does it include stripped lowers that are sold as "other" on 4473s, nor 80% receivers nor parts kits and homemade/privately made/personally made firearms.

If over 24 million semiautomatic modular/tactical rifles are "not in common use for lawful purposes"; what's the threshold?

 

[ilikegunspdx]

Technological improvements from time of founding does not matter. Common use for lawful purposes does matter.

Computers, telephones, etc did not exist at time of founding yet 1st amendment right to free speech using modern devices does not change.

 

[Loc]

Historically, types of weapons were also prohibited.


And the common use isn't unequivocal - it's unclear when that refers to.


I'm not defending the law but pointing out what sort of problems the plaintiffs have.

Heller stated that to ban a firearm, it must be "...dangerous and unusual...", so that is where the clarity lies.

 

[RX-79G]

Following Bruen, historical analogies up to 1791 are allowed. I do not know of any nationwide nor Statewide Prohibition of types of weapons from the common people that existed then.

Following NSSF(National Shooting Sports Foundation) ; there are over 24 million Modern Sporting Rifles imported or manufactured by FFLs/companies in the US from 1992 to 2020ish; this is not just ARs but also AKs and similar. This does not include AR/AK based pistols, nor does it include stripped lowers that are sold as "other" on 4473s, nor 80% receivers nor parts kits and homemade/privately made/personally made firearms.

If over 24 million semiautomatic modular/tactical rifles are "not in common use for lawful purposes"; what's the threshold?

It doesn't sound like there is a threshold if legislatures are able to wait until a weapon appears to be "unusual or dangerous" to then take action. The fact that AR15s became immensely popular during the rise of mass shootings doesn't help argue against such a conclusion.

The Bowie knife referenced had a similar history. And was also banned from public use by the features or "additions" that define it from other knives.

 

[RX-79G]

Heller stated that to ban a firearm, it must be "...dangerous and unusual...", so that is where the clarity lies.

Dangerous vs common. Handguns, as referenced in Heller, are exceedingly common and have long fulfilled a self defense role. Military style rifles only recently became common, and during a sharp uptick in dangerous use.

Heller doesn't grant anything "unequivocally" as far as I could see. SCOTUS identified a common lawful purpose and long history connected to handguns. Military style rifles don't obviously have either, especially since the court has found that not-so-military weapons like pistols serve as militia weapons.


1240 goes out of its way to connect the ban to a specific danger, so the plaintiffs are going to need to either show little danger, or that this kind of arm was common long before the danger was evident. If not, then the law only curtails a sub-class of rifles and a sub-class of semiauto rifles and may be allowed to stand.

If I were the plaintiffs I would be gathering information about the prevalence of similar arms in the past, alternative explanations for the rise of mass shootings and attempting to show that the firearms market offers no ready alternatives to military style rifles, so the ban is actually a defacto ban on all center-fire semiauto rifles, and that is a common class.

 

[CamoDeafie]

Military style rifles only recently became common, and during a sharp uptick in dangerous use.

Patently false.

Muskets and rifles were standard in the time of Founding, they were clearly "Military Style" rifles all the way back to the days of muskets. In fact; every rifle type can trace their roots to military rifles issued and sold, including lever actions and rolling blocks.

M1 Garand semiautomatic rifles are military rifles; yet may be banned due to 1240 for having "evil features"

 

[Koda]

Military style rifles only recently became common, and during a sharp uptick in dangerous use.

The lever gun was a military rifle that was just as popular then as the AR is now.

Edit to add, and during a sharp uptick in violence ("wild wild west")

 

[The Heretic]

The lever gun was a military rifle that was just as popular then as the AR is now.

Often called "repeaters" - at least in Westerns.

 

[RX-79G]

Patently false.

Muskets and rifles were standard in the time of Founding, they were clearly "Military Style" rifles all the way back to the days of muskets. In fact; every rifle type can trace their roots to military rifles issued and sold, including lever actions and rolling blocks.

M1 Garand semiautomatic rifles are military rifles; yet may be banned due to 1240 for having "evil features"

I'm using a shorthand for the full "military style semiautomatic assault rifle". I think you know that. The law doesn't use the word military, but that's the reality of the banned features.

So if you want to show it's false, you would want to do as I suggested and collect data about civilian owned AW type ownership numbers going back to the 1920s. One thing the judge could find is that the state was too broad in banning all rifles of this kind when the specific "danger" is a few models.

 

[RX-79G]

The lever gun was a military rifle that was just as popular then as the AR is now.

Edit to add, and during a sharp uptick in violence ("wild wild west")

The ban is on semiautos with military features.

 

[The Heretic]

As we all know, the "unusual & dangerous" prohibition/constraint is bovine fecal matter too. There is nothing in the Second Amendment about such constraints.

 

[Koda]

The ban is on semiautos with military features.

Yes, but we do have a history of military rifles in common use that dates back before ARs became popular.
That said I get your point and not certain our witneseses would be able to use or even think of remembering the history, common use of military lever guns. I do think common use applies to todays fight for todays military pattern rifles.

 

[CamoDeafie]

I'm using a shorthand for the full "military style semiautomatic assault rifle". I think you know that. The law doesn't use the word military, but that's the reality of the banned features.

So if you want to show it's false, you would want to do as I suggested and collect data about civilian owned AW type ownership numbers going back to the 1920s. One thing the judge could find is that the state was too broad in banning all rifles of this kind when the specific "danger" is a few models.

Commonly Owned: NSSF Announces Over 24 Million MSRs in Circulation

NSSF updated the industry estimate of Modern Sporting Rifles (MSRs) in circulation in the United States to 24,446,000 since 1990.

www.nssf.org

Only goes back to 1990, but is specifically about "modern sporting rifles" that are also called "assault weapons".


One point, FBI Uniform Crime Reporting stats do point out that rifles of all kinds make up for a very small percentage of firearm homicides

Expanded Homicide Data Table 8

ucr.fbi.gov

Using 2015 data, out of 10,398 firearms murder victims; only 300 involved rifles, when known. (no further breakdown on type of rifles). The vast majority of gun homicides are with handguns, when the firearms used are known.


Edit. With over 24 million ARs/AKs/similar rifles and under 400 firearms homicides per year using rifles when known; a point can be made that ARs/MSRs are commonly possessed for lawful purposes.

 

[RX-79G]

As we all know, the "unusual & dangerous" prohibition/constraint is bovine fecal matter too. There is nothing in the Second Amendment about such constraints.

But there is in Heller and the rest of the SCOTUS decisions we're relying on, written by the most conservative justices.

 

[RX-79G]

Commonly Owned: NSSF Announces Over 24 Million MSRs in Circulation

NSSF updated the industry estimate of Modern Sporting Rifles (MSRs) in circulation in the United States to 24,446,000 since 1990.

www.nssf.org

Only goes back to 1990, but is specifically about "modern sporting rifles" that are also called "assault weapons".


One point, FBI Uniform Crime Reporting stats do point out that rifles of all kinds make up for a very small percentage of firearm homicides

Expanded Homicide Data Table 8

ucr.fbi.gov

Using 2015 data, out of 10,398 firearms murder victims; only 300 involved rifles, when known. (no further breakdown on type of rifles). The vast majority of gun homicides are with handguns, when the firearms used are known.

But 1240's stated purpose is not to decrease homicide in general but mass shootings in specific. Do that really doesn't matter unless you can show that the state has no business preferring one sort of murder over another.

 

[Loc]

Dangerous vs common.

If I were the plaintiffs I would be gathering information about the prevalence of similar arms in the past, alternative explanations for the rise of mass shootings and attempting to show that the firearms market offers no ready alternatives to military style rifles, so the ban is actually a defacto ban on all center-fire semiauto rifles, and that is a common class.

Caetano established what the "in common use" test is: 200,000.

Completely agree on the approach you describe.

 

[The Heretic]

But there is in Heller and the rest of the SCOTUS decisions we're relying on, written by the most conservative justices.

Just goes to show that they don't "get it" either. Not encouraging.

There is no "common use" test for our other rights - indeed, objectionable speech is still mostly protected as long as it isn't libelous/slanderous (and even then, if it is a "public figure" it is protected).

The closest thing in First Amendment speech laws/precedents to Second Amendment constraints, is "obscene" speech, which is also bovine fecal matter to placate prudes.

 

[CamoDeafie]

Expanded Homicide Data Table 9

ucr.fbi.gov

Expanded Homicide Data Table 11

ucr.fbi.gov

Table 20

ucr.fbi.gov

Nothing about "mass shootings" but each table shown, clearly indicates a specific trend and locations.....

Edit. Source for each of these tables.

Expanded Offense

ucr.fbi.gov

 

[Diamondback]

This is bullcrap on stilts, even in the Founders' day full-auto was a thing (Puckle Gun) just rare and expensive.

This hack judge should be impeached for at best functional illiterat and at worst out right dropping trou and Bowl Blastering right into SCOTUS's face.