It’s a lower court ruling from a federal court in Kansas. So it has no real precedent elsewhere, and I’m pretty sure it’ll be appealed, but I thought it was an interesting case.
4 Likes
It is fascinating in that it appears to be the first argument that military style weaponry can be owned without government interference.
2A has the least history of going through legal battles of all the amendments. 1A, OTOH, went through a crucible-like experience much like what 2A is going through now. No one seriously doubted that 2A was intended to give the citizenry the ability to revolt if need be. Disarmed farmers can’t do much rebelling without doing a lot of dying. The power of the armed citizen was hugely demonstrated when a bunch of farmers stood off the best infantry in the world, when the Brits attacked in the War of 1812. So in addition to trashing them at sea with our pseudo-frigates, we destroyed two of their armies - one before Philadelphia and one outside of New Orleans. These were regular guys who dropped their farm implements and picked up their rifles and went and out shot the Brits. The casualty figures were horrendous on the Brit side; not so much on the American side.
Anyway now with the communists/Dems pushing the limits, we are seeing lots more cases where the government is overstepping their limits. Liberal judges are disappearing, and with them their bizarre concept of governance. Another couple years and hopefully the ATF will become the AT.
2 Likes