Court Upholding Ban on Militia-Suitable Firearms Ignores Key Second Amendment Purpose
By David Codrea published on August 15, 2014 in Legal Issues
*** begin quote ***
U.S. District Judge Catherine C. Blake decided Tuesday against plaintiffs in Kolbe v O’Malley, a challenge to Maryland’s Firearm Safety Act, ruling “assault weapons” and their standard-capacity magazines “fall outside Second Amendment protection as dangerous and unusual.”
The Clinton-appointed judge went through double-jointed judicial contortions, revealing politically-motivated hostilities to be dissected by no shortage of legal scholars and pundits. They, and readers following their work, will be examining case details and disconnects, including prejudicial weapon descriptions, agenda-driven “expert” testimony, and myriad questionable assertions presumed by the court to be indisputable facts. Those include allegations of enhanced danger posed by the affected firearms, challenges to the effectiveness of the weapons in home-defense situations, dismissal of the relative distribution of such guns among the population, abuses of the demonized weaponry by criminals, and offensive police training comparison arguments used to undermine equal protection and disparage gun-owner competency. Those can then all be balanced against fraudulent “compelling state interest” and judicial scrutiny-level arguments, as if the security of a free State isn’t the most compelling interest, and as if unalienable rights don’t merit the strictest scrutiny.
*** end quote ***
What part of “shall not be infringed” doesn’t the judges, politicians, and bureaucrats not understand?
You can not parse a “right”!
The ability to resist the Gooferment and it’s Gestapo is fundamental.
# – # – # – # – #