If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Note: the banner ads have been temporarily disabled pending new photo host. We'll get them running again soon.
Meanwhile the AW ban in MA was upheld yesterday, a 3 judge State Supreme court panel publishing the decision that included a quote to the effect that "Using an AR or AK to defend one's self inside one's home is akin to using a sledge hammer to crack open a peanut".
So now the judges get to decide which type of self defense tools are "reasonable" for the serfs to use? This MA decision flies DIRECTLY in the face of Heller. WTF?
Perhaps they'd prefer I set them on fire with my 200 year old flintlock coach gun, aka the "flamethrower"?
Good point. The judge basically endorsed using an "assault weapon" for home defense. Who doesn't want a tool that provides an unfair advantage when you life is on the line?
When it comes to life or death, there’s no such thing as an unfair defensive advantage
​​​​​​When your life is on the line isn't that what you want? Sounds like an AR or AK are very effective at stopping a threat according to the judge.
Good point. The judge basically endorsed using an "assault weapon" for home defense. Who doesn't want a tool that provides an unfair advantage when you life is on the line?
"Using an AR or AK to defend one's self inside one's home is akin to using a sledge hammer to crack open a peanut".
​​​​​​When your life is on the line isn't that what you want? Sounds like an AR or AK are very effective at stopping a threat according to the judge.
Is this the same case where the judges were predicting an upcoming SCOTUS determination that 2A cases would require strict scrutiny?
One may only hope that Clarence Thomas gets to bat on this
as I have posted before "scrutiny" is an invention of the legal system to make you run through the whole gamut of Courts, if You are fortunate to have the Money
any 2A Case should require "strict?" scrutiny as it involves a Federal Question ...
but ..
Is this the same case where the judges were predicting an upcoming SCOTUS determination that 2A cases would require strict scrutiny? If so, could this ruling just be a way to avoid ruling in a way they know will be overruled in the near future?
Meanwhile the AW ban in MA was upheld yesterday, a 3 judge State Supreme court panel publishing the decision that included a quote to the effect that "Using an AR or AK to defend one's self inside one's home is akin to using a sledge hammer to crack open a peanut".
So now the judges get to decide which type of self defense tools are "reasonable" for the serfs to use? This MA decision flies DIRECTLY in the face of Heller. WTF?
Leave a comment: