Supreme Court Lets Stand Gun Storage Requirement, Ban On Hollow Point Ammo

By AWR Hawkins

Hollow Point Ammo Ban
Hollow Point Ammo Ban
AmmoLand Gun News
AmmoLand Gun News

Washington DC – -( On June 8 2015, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) chose not to overturn two gun controls in San Francisco, one of which requires gun owners to lock their guns up in their homes and another which bans hollow point ammunition.

The case came to the SCOTUS on appeal from the NRA and gun owners in San Francisco.

The lock-up requirement contains that caveat that the homeowner can leave his or her gun unlocked if it remains on their person and the hollow point ban is worded to prohibit “the sale of ammunition that expands on impact, has ‘no sporting purpose’ and is commonly referred to as hollow-point bullets.”

According to ABC News, “Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas said they would have heard the appeal.” But they would needed two more justices, as four justices are needed to grant cert.

This is a troublesome decision for gun owners and freedom lovers in two ways:

1. It lets the hollow point ban focus on the “sporting purpose” of a certain ammunition to determine viability. Yet the focus of the Second Amendment is not sport, but self-defense. In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), Justice Samuel Alito made clear that self-defense is a “the central component of the Second Amendment right.”

2. Heller (2008) and McDonald v Chicago (2010) were seminal SCOTUS decisions that protected the amendment that protects the right to keep and bear arms. Yet both decisions–as crucial as they were–were decided by a 5 to 4 vote in the SCOTUS. In both cases, the viability of the Second Amendment hung by one vote. The denial of cert regarding San Francisco gun control could mean the one vote needed to protect gun rights can no longer be counted on.

On the other hand, the SCOTUS could just be waiting for a circuit split before granting a review.

Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter @AWRHawkins.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Comparing America to a big wet sponge that the Progressives are trying to squeeze dry, we gun owners are like pins and needles in that sponge. LOL

Ken Kiger

Here is the dictionary meaning of “regulated” used during the writing of the Second Amendment, which is the only one that counts: REGULATE early 15c., “adjust by rule, control,” …. “to control by rule, direct,” … . Meaning “to govern by restriction” is from 1620s. Related: Regulated; regulating. From: “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.” For those still overcome by propaganda: The Second Amendment declares by implication that if the “MILITIA” is not “WELL REGULATED” by “PEOPLE” keeping… Read more »


This is just another sad example of the anti-constitution philosophy that sits on the bench of no-conservative-regard.
They decide based on personal beliefs and one-side ideology. Let’s hope we can survive till 2016.


Over a hundred million gun owners in America. Do the politicians really expect them all to ‘roll over’ and comply with this sort of nonsense?


Thats why Obama asks his generals if they would fire on American civilians. Thats why drone use was legalized in the U.S. .


I say, your timepiece is WELL REGULATED.

I agree that the court will hear the case in the future
when we have less liberal justices on the court.


Don’t let this happen! America Wake Up!


I don’t use hollow point. I use polymer tipped Hornady ‘Critical Duty +P ammunition. Do like Obama does. Change the name of the ammo to something different that ‘hollow point’.


I think the current regime knows about over-penetration and wants it, so they can clamp down on THOSE rounds too. They can say that no ammo is safe in the hands of the citizens.



This video explains it perfectly –

Fred Pyle

Take a really good look at England and Australia. It’s coming here.


Ban guns or magazines or ammo equals a civil war, and an empowering of our enemies. Exactly the goal of hussien.

Dan Starks

To allow the government to determine what we can shoot out of our guns is just the beginning of a slippery slope that will undermine the 2nd amendment. There are already so many restrictions and regulations on the industry that more only promises and all out attempt to ban everything! I am not concerned for my own well being however that of my granddaughter and her friends. who have little idea what this is really all about and could easily end up living in a “gun free” society (only for the law abiding citizens!) It is always easier to keep… Read more »

Einar Petersen

Until we can get a Non-Communist/Non-Progressive President who can nominate a “Conservative” and “sane” replacement Justice, this idiocy will continue. “Constitutional” decisions should be made on the original intent of their writing into the Constitution, NOT on the personal beliefs and agendas of a few warped enablers of despots, such as we have in the White House, at this time.


You believe Obama is progressive, in what way is he similar to JFK?

Arthur Turner

Does this mean that only full-metal-jacket round nosed bullets can be used for self defense? These are notorious for over-penetration (especially in 9mm) and inflicting wounds to bystanders beyond the intended target. Additionally, they have been proven to be the least effective for quickly stopping an attacker. ALL of my defensive ammo is Glasser Safety Slugs. These are horribly expensive and no longer manufactured. It cost me a small fortune to stock up before they were no longer available. I have used them in 45ACP on attacking wild dogs (One was a pit bull). All three dogs dropped in their… Read more »

Rene Monzon

Remember,these justices were appointed by Emperor Barry!!!


Scotus will not step down willingly. Henc the need for the 2nd Amendment, it sustains itself.


they’re absolutely wrong I’ll holla. Will do more than just one thing I’ll follow. Generally will stop and stay within the target that is intended to be shocked second do they want ball a munition zipping through everybody’s homes someone tries to defend themselves I don’t think so I think they need to go back and take a hard look at the facts and see what hollow points really do do they’re safer than falling monition especially when hunting or even self-defense I ended there


…so does POTUS and FLOTUS…..


All of my hunting ammo is expanding hollow or soft point . LIARS , the 2nd Amendment says shall not be infringed , SCOTUS needs to step down .

John Jones

The second amendment also says “well-regulated”

F Riehl, Editor in Chief

John. Well regulated in that time meant “”Well Supplied” or “Working Well”, look it up.

“The phrase “well-regulated” was in common use long before 1789, and remained so for a century thereafter. It referred to the property of something being in proper working order. Something that was well-regulated was calibrated correctly, functioning as expected. Establishing government oversight of the people’s arms was not only not the intent in using the phrase in the 2nd amendment, it was precisely to render the government powerless to do so that the founders wrote it.”


That’s true ammoland. Still does mean that. Something that is well regulated is something that is running as designed, or as intended. And the second was clearly designed to protect out right to self defense.


If your clock is “well regulated” does that mean the government is doing a good job of controlling it? Yeah.

Leo 6

So I use ball ammunition it penetrates the subject and hits and kills a child. Is the SC now responsible for the child’s death based on this ruling?