Monday, November 27, 2017

Ban on Assault Weapons/Open Carry Left Intact by U.S. Supreme Court

“The U.S. Supreme Court steered clear of the intensifying gun debate after the mass shootings in Nevada and Texas, turning away two appeals from firearms advocates, including one that sought a constitutional right to own a semiautomatic assault rifle. The justices, without comment Monday, left intact a ruling that upheld Maryland’s ban on assault weapons. In a separate case, the high court refused to require Florida to let handguns be carried openly in public.
“The Supreme Court has repeatedly rebuffed gun advocates since it ruled in 2010 that people across the country have the right to keep a firearm in the home for self-defense. That case represents the last time the high court heard arguments on the reach of the Second Amendment. Opponents say easy access to guns is to blame for continued mass shootings in the U.S., including the Oct. 1 massacre of 58 people at a concert in Las Vegas and the slaughter just a month later of 26 people in a Texas church.
“In the Maryland case, a federal appeals court said assault weapons, including the popular AR-15, aren’t protected by the Second Amendment. The appeals court pointed to the Supreme Court’s 2008 Heller decision, which included a line suggesting that states and cities could ban the M-16 rifle, a military version of the AR-15. ‘We have no power to extend Second Amendment protection to the weapons of war that the Heller decision explicitly excluded from such coverage,’ Judge Robert King wrote for the majority.
“The appeals court voted 10-4 to uphold the ban. Maryland enacted its assault-weapon ban after the 2012 shooting that left 20 children and six educators dead at an elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut. The measure also bans detachable magazines that have a capacity of more than 10 rounds…” (U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Assault Rifle, Open-Carry Appeals). 


  1. In the court case alluded to in the article, District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the federal appeals court ruled that the District of Columbia law prohibiting handguns violated the individual’s right to possess firearms under the 2nd amendment. The Supreme Court granted certiorari (a writ issued by a higher court to obtain records on a case from a lower court so that the case can be reviewed), nevertheless.

  2. I have always agreed with background checks for private and gun show sales, and “gun control legislation [that mandates] prohibitions on concealed weapons and possession of firearms by felons and the mentally-deranged, and laws imposing conditions and qualifications on a [specific] commercial sale of arms [such as high-powered assault weapons]…” (District of Columbia v. Heller – Case Brief Summary); however, gun control legislation that will affect responsible law-abiding citizens will never deter the potentially-deranged terrorist from obtaining illegal weapons, despite the government's long-ago feeble attempt to require states to automate a list of past felons and other mentally-disturbed individuals in the federal database. Why? It is impossible to predict who will become the next mentally-disturbed assassin.