US Court Upholds Chicago Suburb's Assault Weapons Ban

ABC

A U.S. appeals court Monday upheld a Chicago suburb's assault weapons ban that had become a focus in the statewide debate over gun control, though a dissenting judge sharply criticized the majority opinion.

In a 2-to-1 decision, a panel of the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago concluded the city of Highland Park's 2013 ban does not violate the Second Amendment, saying municipalities ought to have leeway in deciding how to regulate firearms.

"If a ban on semi-automatic guns and large-capacity magazines reduces the perceived risk from a mass shooting, and makes the public feel safer as a result, that's a substantial benefit," the 12-page majority opinion says.

The legal battle over Highland Park's ordinance drew national players in the gun debate, including a brief filed with the 7th Circuit defending the ban from the Washington, D.C.-based Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, and briefs opposing it filed by weapons manufacturers, including Sig Sauer Inc., and Smith & Wesson Corp.

Monday's decision sets precedent not just for Illinois but for two other states in the judicial circuit — Indiana and Wisconsin. Of Illinois' 1,300 municipalities, no more than a few dozen have regulations or bans similar to Highland Park's.

Democratic Congressman Rick Nolan Poses with an Evil Black Assault Rifle

from ssgmarkcr

I couldn't pass this one up considering the recent talk of irresponsible conservative politicians and their support from pro gun groups.  This even sort of applies to your post regarding to pro gun politicians being photographed holding guns to garner votes.  Well, it seems that antigun politicians aren't immune either. 

    In this case, its incumbent Rick Nolan, who is being challenged by Republican Stuart Mills III.  Then Mr. Nolan spoke about his campaign at my class on state and local government in Brainerd when he was challenging and won the seat from Republican incumbent Chip Cravaak.  After his talk, I had the opportunity to ask him up front his position on Second Amendment issues, and as most politicians do, he said he supported it.  However, when asked if he supported the DFL Party platform, claimed he hadn't read it yet, said hunters don't need an assault rifle (his words), then rushed off claiming an appointment.

    So imagine my surprise/glee when this politician who makes no secret of his wish to ban assault weapons apparently tweets a photo of himself holding one of those evil rifles.

http://www.startribune.com/politics/statelocal/276952411.html

    The photograph's depiction of not only his hypocrisy and his weapon handling technique needless to say supplies ammo (pun intended) to his opponents. 

"The Minnesota Gun Owners Political Action Committee has offered to pay for firearms training for Democratic congressman Rick Nolan at the chain of retail stores owned by the family of his Republican opponent, Stewart Mills.

The offer came in response to a picture posted to Nolan’s Twitter account Wednesday showing the congressman holding an AR-15 rile with his finger on the trigger while surrounded by supporters."

Gun rights have emerged as a key issue in the Eighth Congressional District race. Mills released a campaign ad this summer that claimed Nolan is among the politicians who “have no respect for the Second Amendment.”

Nolan earned a ‘F’ rating The National Rifle Association’s Political Victory Fund, but dismissed Mills’ ad as a “big lie, smear tactic.” Nolan aides said the congressman declined comment on Strawser’s offer.

“The basic rules of firearms safety, taught to students as young as 12 in [Minnesota Department of Natural Resources] hunter safety classes, state clearly that one’s finger should be kept off the trigger until ready to shoot,” Strawser said.

“It’s nothing short of hypocritical for Mr. Nolan to be photographed at what appears to be a campaign event while holding an AR-15 rifle,” Strawser said. “Mr. Nolan has specifically called for a ban on the very rifle he is holding in this photograph.”

The Minnesota Gun Owners PAC offered to buy firearms training for Nolan at Mills Fleet Farm Indoor Shooting location in Baxter.

But the political point was to challenge a Nolan assertion. During an appearance on CBS’ “Face the Nation,” said that “I don’t need an assault rifle to shoot a duck or protect my family.”

    This campaign holds a personal interest to me in that I live in the 8th District and am also a member of the PAC who has kindly offered to show the good Congressman the proper way to hold a firearm.  In fact, I recently won 1,600 rounds of ammo at a fundraising drawing for the group.

California's Tim Donnelly: Assault Weapons Ban Erases the Second Amendment

Breitbart News

Donnelly was referencing SB374--a bill which broadens the definition of an "assault weapon" and then bans all such weapons within the state. 

Donnelly talked to Breitbart News about the bill on October 7:

SB374 basically erases the Second Amendment. We have California-only fuel, California-only this and California-only that, and with SB374 we are pursuing a California-only version of the Constitution. It's a version that will not have a Second Amendment.

This bill takes rifles that are semi-automatic with a detachable magazine--rifles that were lawfully purchased and are lawfully owned--and it bans them, period. If you own a gun that is on the ban list you will have to register it and it becomes non-transferrable. Therefore, although the government will allow you to keep the gun in your possession until you die, once you die it will be confiscated and taken out of circulation. 

This means if you own the M1 Carbine that helped us win in the Pacific during WWII--a gun that shoots a small .30 caliber bullet--if you own one, you would not be able to pass it on to your children.

This is an illegal and egregious confiscation plan. 

Donnelly says the bill's straightforward attack on the Second Amendment "deprives Californians of their basic civil rights to self-defense and to defend themselves from tyranny."

SB374 is sitting on Gov. Brown's desk. He has until October 13 to sign it into law. 

The most pro-gun Supreme Court of all time even said that no Constitutional right is limitless.  But, the gun-rights fanatics conveniently forget that when they get on their soap box.

I can't wait to see what Governor Brown does with this bill, and what happens to Donnelly in his bid to oust the Gov.

I tend to think Californians generally consider this guy a dangerous fanatic who belongs in Arkansas rather than The Land of El Dorado.

What's your opinion?  Please leave a comment.

The Daily News Cover

Obama Still Pushing the Assault Weapons Ban

 
Reuters/Reuters - U.S. Vice President Joseph Biden talks before U.S. President Barack Obama signs the Violence Against Women Act while at the Department of Interior in Washington, March 7, 2013. REUTERS/Larry Downing

Yahoo News

Vice President Joe Biden said on Wednesday that the Obama administration would continue to press for an assault weapons ban as part of gun control legislation despite a serious setback on the issue earlier this week.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid acknowledged on Tuesday that there was not enough support for the ban in the Senate, meaning it would fail when gun control legislation comes to the floor of the chamber next month.

Biden, who has led President Barack Obama's push for tighter gun regulations, said he was undeterred.

"We are still pushing that it pass," Biden told NPR in an interview, according to its website.

"I believe that the vast majority of the American people agree with us, the vast majority of gun owners agree with us, that military-style assault weapons are — these are weapons of war. They don't belong in the street," he said.

Wstch out. Maybe they're gonna pull one of those "Lincoln" things and surprise everybody.

What do you think?  Please leave a comment.

Pro-Gun Folks are Right - Assault Weapons are not the Main Problem

The Blaze

(Source: Washington Examiner/FBI)

Ronald Reagan Agreed - Scalia too

Both Sides of the Assault Weapons Ban Debate

via TTAG

A Case to Ban High Capacity Magazines and Assault Weapons by a Conservative Judge

Larry Alan Burns is the federal district judge in San Diego, who sentenced Jared Loughner.

via Tom Diaz' Facebook Page

So what's the alternative? Bring back the assault weapons ban, and bring it back with some teeth this time. Ban the manufacture, importation, sale, transfer and possession of both assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Don't let people who already have them keep them. Don't let ones that have already been manufactured stay on the market. I don't care whether it's called gun control or a gun ban. I'm for it.

I say all of this as a gun owner. I say it as a conservative who was appointed to the federal bench by a Republican president. I say it as someone who prefers Fox News to MSNBC, and National Review Online to the Daily Kos. I say it as someone who thinks the Supreme Court got it right in District of Columbia vs. Heller, when it held that the 2nd Amendment gives us the right to possess guns for self-defense. (That's why I have mine.) I say it as someone who, generally speaking, is not a big fan of the regulatory state.

Sounds pretty simple to me, especially the "with some teeth in it this time."

What's your opinion?  Please leave a comment.