Today is Tuesday, September 30, 2014rss RSS feed
AR15 Gun Ban No Guns

Federal Judge Rules Millions of AR-15 Rifles Not Covered by Second Amendment

AmmoLand Gun News

AmmoLand Gun News

Manasquan, NJ --(Ammoland.com)- U.S. Federal Judge Catherine C. Blake has released a lengthy opinion (see below)  which essentially says guns regulated by Maryland last year, including the AR-15 and the AK-style rifle-along with other magazine fed, semi-automatics fall outside Second Amendment protections, calling them “dangerous and unusual arms”.

 U.S. Federal Judge Catherine C. Blake

U.S. Federal Judge Catherine C. Blake, fails basic Constitution test, “shall not infringed means what?”

The opinion comes in a case brought by the Associated Gun Clubs of Baltimore, Maryland Licensed Firearms Dealers Association, Maryland State Rifle and Pistol Association and the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) brought challenging the constitutionality of Maryland’s new law.

Among her arguments, Judge Blake wrote that “the court was not persuaded that assault weapons are commonly possessed based on the absolute number of those weapons owned by the public.”

“Blake went on to write that, even accepting the 8.2 million “assault weapons” in civilian hands, they represented no more than three percent of the current civilian gun stock with ownership “highly concentrated” into less than one-percent of the U.S. population.”

In a written statement one of the plaintiffs in the case, Maryland Shall Issue said;

“Maryland Shall Issue is disappointed to announce that the “Assault Weapons” ban provision of SB281 has been held constitutional by the District Court. We thank the judge for her willingness to hear our claims and render a timely opinion. ”

“We will be pursuing an appeal.”

Baltimore District Court Gun Ruling Gun Are Dangerous

  • 42 User comments to “Federal Judge Rules Millions of AR-15 Rifles Not Covered by Second Amendment”

    1. TexStan on August 13, 2014 at 3:27 PM said:

      Obviously Judge Blake does not know the first thing about firearms, but is still considered qualified to opine. What h*rsesh*t.

    2. Stan522 on August 13, 2014 at 4:53 PM said:

      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.

      Seems clearly written to me…..

    3. thepunisher on August 13, 2014 at 5:38 PM said:

      This is why I keep telling people that the main focus of a presidential election (as well as the Congress): IT’S THE JUDGES!… IT’S THE JUDGES!…

    4. Judges, under the separation of powers doctrine, cannot overturn law (granted, they commit the act of overturning but the constitution has set up no such tribunal nor given judges that kind of authority to legislate from the bench or nullify law). The supremacy clause prohibits this activity and in accordance with 16th American Jurisprudence, 2nd edition, section 177, if, in fact, an unconstitutional law has been passed, it is unconstitutional from its inception…not from the date so branding it.

    5. D. Murphy on August 14, 2014 at 7:29 AM said:

      Democrats, they can find the “right” in the Constitution to abort unborn childern, but not the right to keep and bear arms.

    6. Patriot-Research on August 14, 2014 at 11:47 AM said:

      Let get one thing straight, and I am not speaking from Laymen or ignorant perspective, I hold a JD in Law and we studied Constitutional Law in-depth in Law School and this Fed Judge has clearly used her power of the bench to over step her boundaries against the 2nd Amendment! The 2nd Amendment clearly states for one, “Shall Not Be Infringed” and this Judge has clearly infringed upon our 2nd Amendment Rights, two, in Law we used various test to validate Evidence in Court Cases, and the BIG TEST here in this case is whether or not the AR15 is a commonly used/Purchased Fire Arm. Yes the AR15 and the AK47 clearly meet this test just by the purchasing of Million of these Rifles alone, let alone being used for Hunting, Range Shooting, and most of all Home Defense! This Judge clearly did not weight the evidence, i.e. do any real research, and has used her own personal bias ti invalidate Millions of Weapons…She has broken the Law and way, way over steps her authority! That being said and by LAW based on what is written in OUR U.S. Constitution, “We the People” have no obligation to abide by a Judges Illegal Ruling..!!! And Millions of US WON’T..!!! People need to see the forest through the tree, this is just another attempt to end run around the 2nd Amendment to get our Guns…PERIOD..!!! Never surrender, and Never Forget!

    7. I am worried more that judges feel they have the right to look beyond the actual written words and intent of the US Constitution rather than consider the wisdom of those that wrote it, regardless of their time in history. The Constitution is based on wisdom pulled from the histories of wise thinkers in the 17th Century and earlier such as John Locke and Algernon Sydney and going back more than 2200 years to ancients such as Homes and Cicero. There is NO PLACE for this woman judge to play politics. She should be pulled from the bench and disbarred.

    8. USPatriotOne on August 14, 2014 at 12:07 PM said:

      People need to see this Judges ruling for what it really is…A Fed Gun Grab! Judge declares AR15 and AK47’s and the like Illegal. OB signs and Executive Order for all Americans to turn in their AR15’s, AK47’s and all Semi-Auto Rifles and Hand Guns since they are now illegal to own(that is what this ruling really states)! Nearly no one complies…OB declares Martial Law to get OUR Guns..!!! People, this is all part of the Commie/Muslim/NWO plan to destroy America and enslave “We the People,” and this Judge just put the final nail in our ability to defend ourselves from the Tyranny surrounding “We the People”..!!! And Patriot-Research is correct, “We the People” our not obligated to follow any illegal Judgement paased down by any court or any Judge even the Supreme Court! It’s clearly written in OUR U.S. Constitution! That why these monsters hate the U.S. Constitution, it give “We the People” the right to remove them by any means nessary and it scares the cr*p out them! This Judge may have just start the 2nd American Civil War! God help us Please!

    9. askeptic on August 14, 2014 at 1:57 PM said:

      I guess that she never read “Miller”.

    10. ray hampton on August 14, 2014 at 2:07 PM said:

      comments and other forms of talking to some people is a WASTE of time , try talking to a skunk instead

    11. Another obama appointee I’m sure. You can see liberal tyrannist all over the bitch !

    12. I’m not a lawyer but I’ve watched just about every police and lawyer show on TV since the 1960’s so I think I am qualified to say…

      The Constitution and our Bill of Rights says it like it is, it is not up to some Judge, Politician, Law Enforcement Officer, TV News Anchor, Clergy, your next door neighbor, etc etc. to tell you or I what we can or can not have.

      If the Judge believes these rifles are ‘assault’ type of firearms, then what will she say about a high performance V8 car, speedboat, airplane or even that old Honda the kid nextdoor drove after underage drinking and caused loss of life in the wreck?

      They tell us ‘we don’t need’ (fill in the blank) because of what some criminal or medically ill citizen did to harm other people.

      You can not legislate what is inside the mind of an individual who is bent on causing harm or loss of life to other law abiding citizens.

      The laws are there as tools for police and prosecution of criminals and those who will become criminals after convicted in court.

    13. […] Federal Judge Rules Millions of AR-15 Rifles Not Covered by Second Amendment […]

    14. KenFromMS on August 15, 2014 at 10:33 AM said:

      I think the RDNK comment kinda sums it up. She does kind of come across as a Lesbo-Obamanoid-Leftist-AntiChrist appointee. When judges of this ilk are getting involved in the Legislative Process, the only solution is some sort of succession by not paying taxes and declaring sovereignty at the State, County, and Local Gated Community level.

    15. She violates Alaska’s Constitution that the Federal Government agreed to The right of the individual to bear arms.
      Machine guns , SBR and suppressors are legal .
      How about she needs a permit, be fingerprinted , submit 2 photos and show cause to use first amendment rights to speak on firearms. I bet she would have a mouthful of no.

    16. Andrew Rei on August 16, 2014 at 9:02 PM said:

      I’ve said/written many times that the Gun Nuts use four logical fallacies to try and justify their gun lunacy.
      The claim that assault weapons are needed for “hunting” is not only a logical fallacy, but dismissed out of hand by most hunters as ridiculous propaganda.
      Gun Nuts ought to thank their lucky stars that the Fascist Feckless Five Christian Con Coward SCOTUS majority takes a “Liberal” view on the Second Amendment…if they didn’t, you wouldn’t be able to possess a gun unless you were part of a “militia” (police force, National Guard, Military)….
      Remember the first 13 words of the Second Amendment, the 13 words the Gun Nuts completely ignore: “a well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state…”
      Now, let’s see how many logical fallacies the Gun Nuts use to try and refute my truthful words….

    17. […] I agree with you but they may have all been there because of this, the ruling came dwon this week. Federal Judge Rules Millions of AR-15 Rifles Not Covered by Second Amendment […]

    18. The Daleks on August 17, 2014 at 6:51 PM said:

      Why do some people think that among all amendments, only the second one can have zero limitations? There are many precedents that proscribe the first: most famously, you can’t falsely shout “fire” in a crowded theater. And the Supreme Court ruled that there are times when fourth amendment protections of search and seizure take a back seat to public safety.

      Many people who yell and shout about the need for such exceptions, and who yell that government should violate the first amendment and enforce religion, are the same people who shout that the second amendment is immutable.

      And there are already restrictions on the second amendment. It doesn’t say anything about guns, it refers to “arms”. It’s already illegal to own many arms, like machine guns, tanks and rocket launchers. The precedent has already been set.

    19. …and queue the gun nuts in 3… 2… 1…

      …because ‘MURIKA!

    20. To all you dipsh#ts referring to the AR-15 and the civilian model of the AK-47 as “assault rifles”, you are proudly displaying your total ignorance about guns. First of all, an “assault rifle” has the capability of “burst” or “fully automatic” fire. The AR-15 and the civilian model of the AK-47 are “semi automatic” ONLY. They are NOT “assault rifles”! Now that I have that out of the way, IF you think, for even a millisecond, that you or anyone else is going to take those weapons away from us, you had better think again. You haven’t seen violence. I’m a veteran of the US Army Infantry and I swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States and, it NEVER expires. Anyone, and I mean ANYONE, who tries to take our weapons will be classified as a “domestic enemy” to our Constitution and THAT, my friend, will put a target on his ass and, trust me, that won’t turn out too well for him.

    21. Once again I see “Public Safety” used as a reason to trim the Constitution . Also it is not against the law to own full auto suuppressed, short barrel weapons it requires NFA approval on form 1 , 3, or 4 . It might be against your state laws not Alaska’s law. 20mm cannons are legally owned in Alaska , they are called Destrucive devices and regulated by NFA laws.So what precedent is Daleks talking about?
      If people stood up for themselves and refused to be a victim there would be alot less crime.

    22. Um, did those of you complaining about this ruling miss a pretty significant word in the 2nd Amendment? Please look up the meaning to well-regulated. You might learn something.

    23. Common Sense on August 18, 2014 at 10:31 AM said:

      8| HAPPY-HAPPY-JOY-JOY

      Finally some common sense headway is being made.
      VOTE BLUE IN NOVEMBER

      In a 47-page opinion issued Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Catherine C. Blake said the law “seeks to address a serious risk of harm to law enforcement officers and the public from the greater power to injure and kill presented by assault weapons and large capacity magazines.”

      Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/aug/12/federal-judge-upholds-strict-new-maryland-gun-laws/

    24. James Veverka on August 18, 2014 at 10:53 AM said:

      Go judge go! There is actually a clause in Scalias holding in Heker v DC about dangerous abd unusual guns

    25. I’m curious, why did Ammoland feel it necessary to publish the judge’s picture? Wishful thinking perhaps? A good guy with a gun stops a bad judge with a gavel….

      As for the second amendment, even members of the SCOTUS have opined that the it might not necessarily provide for the unfettered possession of all manner of weaponry. Further, while I’m sure some of you, scratch that, many of you, love to, “play militia,” on the weekends, we have a professional military and have no need of your delusions of grandeur. Lest I forget, when you blindly focus of the 2nd Amendment’s, “shall not be infringed,” as the only key phrase, you seem to forget that yours hasn’t, shall we sojourn to Walmart and pick up an arsenal? The US has a population of nearly 300 million people, with an amount of privately held weapons approaching that number. Exactly who the hell is being infringed upon?

    26. Predictably, the small-penis ammosexual crowd has shown up to strut their intellectual firepower.
      pew! pew! pew! IP: 71.179.245.44

    27. @Mark – A picture is worth a thousand words. It often helps show what ‘team’ they’re on.

    28. William Carr on August 18, 2014 at 4:40 PM said:

      “Patriot-Research on August 14, 2014 at 11:47 AM said:
      Let get one thing straight, and I am not speaking from Laymen or ignorant perspective, I hold a JD in Law and we studied Constitutional Law in-depth in Law School and this Fed Judge has clearly used her power of the bench to over step her boundaries against the 2nd Amendment!”

      Wait. You claim a JD in Law, and you don’t realize the Judge simply upheld the Constitutionality of the law?

      That’s not undermining the Second Amendment.

      As long as people have the right to own the common weapons used in 1789, rifles and muskets (shotguns) the 2nd Amendment is still in force.

      After all, we banned full-automatic weapons in the 30’s because the Mob was using them to gun people down.

      Thus, a law saying a specific model of SA weapon is banned is quite legal.

    29. @warbler – Why are you ‘warbling’ on about penis size? The only scientific study that links sex and ‘intellectual firepower’ concerns women. It seems the higher their IQ the less their desire for sex?

    30. State laws ban full auto weapons , federal law bans civilian manufacture of post 1986 machine guns. Pre 1986 machine guns are lawful to transfer between individuals with an approved NFA form 4 unless your state prohibits it.39 states allow this.

    31. @Will Carr, nice revisionist spin on the constitution, but your facts are wrong. Automatic machine guns are not banned in the USA, you just need additional federal licenses to own. But some machine guns are banned by states like New Jersey that randomly call them “Assault Weapons”. As for your musket comment, If we apply that logic to free speech then you should only be able to misstate facts like you have done with a quill and ink, as your computer would be regulated.

    32. Kenneth Wood on August 19, 2014 at 6:01 PM said:

      Excellent! It’s about time a judge rendered such a verdict. Thank God there is still some common sense left in this ignorant country.

    33. billybsea on August 19, 2014 at 10:55 PM said:

      Why is that the alleged pro-2nd Amendment folk refuse to acknowledge the prefatory clause: “A well regulated militia”……

    34. Because Alaska State Rights say “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. The INDIVIDUAL RIGHT to keep and bear arms shall not be denied or infringed by the State or a political subdivision of the State .”
      ken wood and billybsea should go live in kalifornia with all the socialist trash wanting to ban living.

    35. Tred Law on August 20, 2014 at 9:43 AM said:

      @billybsea, What is there to acknowledged? “A well regulated militia” means the people should be well armed. Regulated in that time meant “supplied or trained”, NOT restricted by laws. Militia in that time meant the average male person on the street. Don’t tell me you think women should not have guns?

    36. Peter Grace on August 20, 2014 at 11:35 PM said:

      We should all contact our legislators and ask them to show some character and keep their oath of office.

    37. CrustyOldGeezer on August 21, 2014 at 9:25 AM said:

      One corrupt, agenda driven person that was politically appointed to a position she is completely unqualified for, judge makes an official declaration and the liberals proclaim victory.

      Why don’t the voices of 80 MILLION Law Abiding Firearms owners carry an equal amount of weight?

    38. @CrustyOldGeezer – To answer your question, these ‘Progressives’ rule against the majority because they don’t really believe in a Democratic Republic as instituted by America’s founders. How many voter ballot petitions passed by majority have been reversed by judges?

    39. It would really be great if real, actual Americans held these positions.

    40. If there are millions of them they must be common and not unique to the public. That makes them legal according to the Supreme Court.

    41. IN 1791 WHEN THE 2ND AMENDMENT WAS WRITTEN ALL GUNS WERE “MILITARY STYLE”!

    Leave a Comment

    • Sign up Ammoland for your Inbox

      Daily Digest

      Monthly Newsletter

    • Recent Comments

      • TEX: I’m glad this young woman will have her life back !
      • TEX: Zimmerman needs to find a publisher and write a book. It might make him some pretty good money,maybe not !
      • TEX: Did you notice this angry young black woman ? Look at the face on that negro ! Looks like a tranny to me ! Too...
      • TEX: The article is right. We shouldn’t need a permit to carry anywhere that is part of the US ! The liberal...
      • james: We can keep our doctors, what they did not tell us is that we will have to pay them out of our own pockets....
    • Social Activity

    • Most Popular Posts

    • AmmoLand Poll

    Copyright 2014 AmmoLand.com Shooting Sports News | Sitemap | Μολὼν λαβέ
    14403048
    15006000