FPC Wins “Assault Weapon” Lawsuit in Historic Victory for Second Amendment Rights

[Doc7505]

FPC Wins “Assault Weapon” Lawsuit in Historic Victory for Second Amendment Rights​

BREAKING: FPC Wins “Assault Weapon” Lawsuit in Historic Victory for Second Amendment Rights

Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that Judge Roger T. Benitez of the Southern District of California has issued an opinion in Miller v. Bonta (previously Miller v. Becerra), holding that California’s tyrannical ban on so-called “assault weapons” is unconstitutional under the...

www.firearmspolicy.org

4 Jun 2021
SAN DIEGO, CA (June 4, 2021) — Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that Judge Roger T. Benitez of the Southern District of California has issued an opinion in Miller v. Bonta (previously Miller v. Becerra), holding that California’s tyrannical ban on so-called “assault weapons” is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. The opinion, along with other filings in this case, can be viewed at AssaultWeaponLawsuit.com.

In 2019, FPC developed and filed Miller v. Becerra, a federal Second Amendment challenge to California’s Assault Weapons Control Act (AWCA) ban on common semiautomatic arms with certain characteristics, including those with ammunition magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds. Throughout the lawsuit, FPC argued that the State’s ban prohibits arms that are constitutionally protected, no more lethal than other certain arms that are not banned, and commonly possessed and used for lawful purposes in the vast majority of the United States.
In the opinion, the Court ruled that many categories of firearms California bans as so-called “assault weapons” are protected by the Second Amendment, and that “[t]he Second Amendment stands as a shield from government imposition of that policy.”
~Snip~
“In his order today, Judge Benitez held what millions of Americans already know to be true: Bans on so-called ‘assault weapons’ are unconstitutional and cannot stand,” said FPC President Brandon Combs. “This historic victory for individual liberty is just the beginning, and FPC will continue to aggressively challenge these laws throughout the United States. We look forward to continuing this challenge at the Ninth Circuit and, should it be necessary, the Supreme Court.”

Comment:
These arguments of the Progressive Marxist/DSA Democrat Commie left ignore the fact that the very rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution for armed citizens, are the very same sections that allow armed cops and soldiers.

What’s interesting is this illustrates the dishonesty and hypocrisy of the inconsistent right with regard to “states’ rights” dogma.

Clearly Benitez is a tyrant in black robes, legislating from the bench, ignoring the will of the people of the State of California.

~~~~~~

Record number of first time gun owners in California in response to COVID shutdown, concerns over violence - California Political Review

Guv Newsom and the Democrats are the best advertising for the gun industry. As they allow criminals from foreign nations to roam our streets, refuse to stop riots, looting and burning, people are attacked on the street for supporting the United States, people have two choices. Either leave the...

www.capoliticalreview.com

 

[Esdraelon]

Clearly Benitez is a tyrant in black robes, legislating from the bench, ignoring the will of the people of the State of California.

With any luck, you and those YOU love will get to discover exactly how effective your LEOs are in responding to a potentially deadly threat. Good luck. Your choice is your own. When you try to make MY choice for me, it's going to require one hell of a lot more than judicial fiat.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

FPC Wins “Assault Weapon” Lawsuit in Historic Victory for Second Amendment Rights​

BREAKING: FPC Wins “Assault Weapon” Lawsuit in Historic Victory for Second Amendment Rights

Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that Judge Roger T. Benitez of the Southern District of California has issued an opinion in Miller v. Bonta (previously Miller v. Becerra), holding that California’s tyrannical ban on so-called “assault weapons” is unconstitutional under the...

www.firearmspolicy.org

4 Jun 2021
SAN DIEGO, CA (June 4, 2021) — Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that Judge Roger T. Benitez of the Southern District of California has issued an opinion in Miller v. Bonta (previously Miller v. Becerra), holding that California’s tyrannical ban on so-called “assault weapons” is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. The opinion, along with other filings in this case, can be viewed at AssaultWeaponLawsuit.com.

In 2019, FPC developed and filed Miller v. Becerra, a federal Second Amendment challenge to California’s Assault Weapons Control Act (AWCA) ban on common semiautomatic arms with certain characteristics, including those with ammunition magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds. Throughout the lawsuit, FPC argued that the State’s ban prohibits arms that are constitutionally protected, no more lethal than other certain arms that are not banned, and commonly possessed and used for lawful purposes in the vast majority of the United States.
In the opinion, the Court ruled that many categories of firearms California bans as so-called “assault weapons” are protected by the Second Amendment, and that “[t]he Second Amendment stands as a shield from government imposition of that policy.”
~Snip~
“In his order today, Judge Benitez held what millions of Americans already know to be true: Bans on so-called ‘assault weapons’ are unconstitutional and cannot stand,” said FPC President Brandon Combs. “This historic victory for individual liberty is just the beginning, and FPC will continue to aggressively challenge these laws throughout the United States. We look forward to continuing this challenge at the Ninth Circuit and, should it be necessary, the Supreme Court.”

Comment:
These arguments of the Progressive Marxist/DSA Democrat Commie left ignore the fact that the very rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution for armed citizens, are the very same sections that allow armed cops and soldiers.

What’s interesting is this illustrates the dishonesty and hypocrisy of the inconsistent right with regard to “states’ rights” dogma.

Clearly Benitez is a tyrant in black robes, legislating from the bench, ignoring the will of the people of the State of California.

~~~~~~

Record number of first time gun owners in California in response to COVID shutdown, concerns over violence - California Political Review

Guv Newsom and the Democrats are the best advertising for the gun industry. As they allow criminals from foreign nations to roam our streets, refuse to stop riots, looting and burning, people are attacked on the street for supporting the United States, people have two choices. Either leave the...

www.capoliticalreview.com

Much of Benitez’s ruling is ridiculous and childish – comparing the AR 15 to a Swiss Army Knife is truly idiotic.

And whining about ‘the media’ is baseless partisan nonsense.

All Benitez needed to do was cite Miller, as reaffirmed in Heller, that weapons are either ‘in common use’ and entitled to Constitutional protections or ‘dangerous and unusual’ and not within the scope of the Second Amendment – and rule that the AR 15 is ‘in common use’ and therefore entitled to Second Amendment protections.

Benitez’s decision will still be overturned on appeal, but at least it will be a clear, concise decision that may in a few decades make its way to the Supreme Court.

 

[Colin norris]

FPC Wins “Assault Weapon” Lawsuit in Historic Victory for Second Amendment Rights​

BREAKING: FPC Wins “Assault Weapon” Lawsuit in Historic Victory for Second Amendment Rights

Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that Judge Roger T. Benitez of the Southern District of California has issued an opinion in Miller v. Bonta (previously Miller v. Becerra), holding that California’s tyrannical ban on so-called “assault weapons” is unconstitutional under the...

www.firearmspolicy.org

4 Jun 2021
SAN DIEGO, CA (June 4, 2021) — Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that Judge Roger T. Benitez of the Southern District of California has issued an opinion in Miller v. Bonta (previously Miller v. Becerra), holding that California’s tyrannical ban on so-called “assault weapons” is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. The opinion, along with other filings in this case, can be viewed at AssaultWeaponLawsuit.com.

In 2019, FPC developed and filed Miller v. Becerra, a federal Second Amendment challenge to California’s Assault Weapons Control Act (AWCA) ban on common semiautomatic arms with certain characteristics, including those with ammunition magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds. Throughout the lawsuit, FPC argued that the State’s ban prohibits arms that are constitutionally protected, no more lethal than other certain arms that are not banned, and commonly possessed and used for lawful purposes in the vast majority of the United States.
In the opinion, the Court ruled that many categories of firearms California bans as so-called “assault weapons” are protected by the Second Amendment, and that “[t]he Second Amendment stands as a shield from government imposition of that policy.”
~Snip~
“In his order today, Judge Benitez held what millions of Americans already know to be true: Bans on so-called ‘assault weapons’ are unconstitutional and cannot stand,” said FPC President Brandon Combs. “This historic victory for individual liberty is just the beginning, and FPC will continue to aggressively challenge these laws throughout the United States. We look forward to continuing this challenge at the Ninth Circuit and, should it be necessary, the Supreme Court.”

Comment:
These arguments of the Progressive Marxist/DSA Democrat Commie left ignore the fact that the very rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution for armed citizens, are the very same sections that allow armed cops and soldiers.

How is communism associated with the decision? There's no mention of a communist takeover to justify the weapons.

For what would your average citizen use that weapon for "lawful purposes".?

An AR-15, or just rifles in general?

The AR-15 is a great gun for home defense versus the shotgun.....and it is also used for hunting...it is good for hunting wild hogs....I am told......and it is used in competition by shooters of all ages and both sexes......

It also helps keep the democrat party terrorist groups, blm and antifa, from burning down your store when they are burning and looting black neighborhoods for the democrat party just before elections.......

You have never used it for defense of your home and never will. That's propaganda. How often do you go hinting hogs? Honestly. Very rarely.
Used in a gun club? Possibly.

As for shooting rioters, that stupid kid found himself in jail when he opened fire on people.

So don't give me your pathetic justifications for ownership. The truth is you have guns because you can. You will never use them for defense because you haven't the guts to go out. Where were you when BLM did their thing? Cowering in the shed?

If I don't use a rifle, that doesn't mean that millions of others don't use the rifle...are you really this dumb?


Someone I know uses an AR-15 to kill hogs......the ability to follow up is important because they are mean and dangerous.

The store owners who used the AR-15 rifles to keep the democrat party terrrorists in blm and antifa from burning their stores are really glad they had them...

Millions of others do not use thise weapon at all. Like yourself, you have them because you can to inflate your tough guy image and build testosterone.

I never witnessed any store owners mowing people down with automatic weapons and neither did you. You are a liar.

You're digging yourself a hole son. Your excuses don't gel with anything in reality.

So who do you think is looking dumb now? It's certainly not me dickhead.

 

[westwall]

FPC Wins “Assault Weapon” Lawsuit in Historic Victory for Second Amendment Rights​

BREAKING: FPC Wins “Assault Weapon” Lawsuit in Historic Victory for Second Amendment Rights

Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that Judge Roger T. Benitez of the Southern District of California has issued an opinion in Miller v. Bonta (previously Miller v. Becerra), holding that California’s tyrannical ban on so-called “assault weapons” is unconstitutional under the...

www.firearmspolicy.org

4 Jun 2021
SAN DIEGO, CA (June 4, 2021) — Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that Judge Roger T. Benitez of the Southern District of California has issued an opinion in Miller v. Bonta (previously Miller v. Becerra), holding that California’s tyrannical ban on so-called “assault weapons” is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. The opinion, along with other filings in this case, can be viewed at AssaultWeaponLawsuit.com.

In 2019, FPC developed and filed Miller v. Becerra, a federal Second Amendment challenge to California’s Assault Weapons Control Act (AWCA) ban on common semiautomatic arms with certain characteristics, including those with ammunition magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds. Throughout the lawsuit, FPC argued that the State’s ban prohibits arms that are constitutionally protected, no more lethal than other certain arms that are not banned, and commonly possessed and used for lawful purposes in the vast majority of the United States.
In the opinion, the Court ruled that many categories of firearms California bans as so-called “assault weapons” are protected by the Second Amendment, and that “[t]he Second Amendment stands as a shield from government imposition of that policy.”
~Snip~
“In his order today, Judge Benitez held what millions of Americans already know to be true: Bans on so-called ‘assault weapons’ are unconstitutional and cannot stand,” said FPC President Brandon Combs. “This historic victory for individual liberty is just the beginning, and FPC will continue to aggressively challenge these laws throughout the United States. We look forward to continuing this challenge at the Ninth Circuit and, should it be necessary, the Supreme Court.”

Comment:
These arguments of the Progressive Marxist/DSA Democrat Commie left ignore the fact that the very rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution for armed citizens, are the very same sections that allow armed cops and soldiers.

How is communism associated with the decision? There's no mention of a communist takeover to justify the weapons.

For what would your average citizen use that weapon for "lawful purposes".?

The guns are to PREVENT a communist takeover.

Duh.

 

[Doc7505]

FPC Wins “Assault Weapon” Lawsuit in Historic Victory for Second Amendment Rights​

BREAKING: FPC Wins “Assault Weapon” Lawsuit in Historic Victory for Second Amendment Rights

Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that Judge Roger T. Benitez of the Southern District of California has issued an opinion in Miller v. Bonta (previously Miller v. Becerra), holding that California’s tyrannical ban on so-called “assault weapons” is unconstitutional under the...

www.firearmspolicy.org

4 Jun 2021
SAN DIEGO, CA (June 4, 2021) — Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that Judge Roger T. Benitez of the Southern District of California has issued an opinion in Miller v. Bonta (previously Miller v. Becerra), holding that California’s tyrannical ban on so-called “assault weapons” is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. The opinion, along with other filings in this case, can be viewed at AssaultWeaponLawsuit.com.

In 2019, FPC developed and filed Miller v. Becerra, a federal Second Amendment challenge to California’s Assault Weapons Control Act (AWCA) ban on common semiautomatic arms with certain characteristics, including those with ammunition magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds. Throughout the lawsuit, FPC argued that the State’s ban prohibits arms that are constitutionally protected, no more lethal than other certain arms that are not banned, and commonly possessed and used for lawful purposes in the vast majority of the United States.
In the opinion, the Court ruled that many categories of firearms California bans as so-called “assault weapons” are protected by the Second Amendment, and that “[t]he Second Amendment stands as a shield from government imposition of that policy.”
~Snip~
“In his order today, Judge Benitez held what millions of Americans already know to be true: Bans on so-called ‘assault weapons’ are unconstitutional and cannot stand,” said FPC President Brandon Combs. “This historic victory for individual liberty is just the beginning, and FPC will continue to aggressively challenge these laws throughout the United States. We look forward to continuing this challenge at the Ninth Circuit and, should it be necessary, the Supreme Court.”

Comment:
These arguments of the Progressive Marxist/DSA Democrat Commie left ignore the fact that the very rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution for armed citizens, are the very same sections that allow armed cops and soldiers.

How is communism associated with the decision? There's no mention of a communist takeover to justify the weapons.

For what would your average citizen use that weapon for "lawful purposes".?

The guns are to PREVENT a communist takeover.

Duh.

Well, I've used my guns for pest control, killing birds, coyotes, beaver, Antelope, deer, hog, Elk using everything in my collection from 12 gauge, .22 cal, 5.56mm, 6mm, 7.62x39 mm, 30-30 cal and 30.06 including self protection, but I've never shoot a Communist unless it was in Nam and in the bush.
Even then I was using an "Assault Shotgun" in 12 gauge double 00 Buck shot.... gifted to me by a Marine at the Siagon Embassy. But I never used a M-16.
Therefore should all 12 gauge shotguns be banned from civilian use since they were used in battle during WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, Iraq, Afghanistan and now in Syria.

 

[westwall]

FPC Wins “Assault Weapon” Lawsuit in Historic Victory for Second Amendment Rights​

BREAKING: FPC Wins “Assault Weapon” Lawsuit in Historic Victory for Second Amendment Rights

Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that Judge Roger T. Benitez of the Southern District of California has issued an opinion in Miller v. Bonta (previously Miller v. Becerra), holding that California’s tyrannical ban on so-called “assault weapons” is unconstitutional under the...

www.firearmspolicy.org

4 Jun 2021
SAN DIEGO, CA (June 4, 2021) — Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that Judge Roger T. Benitez of the Southern District of California has issued an opinion in Miller v. Bonta (previously Miller v. Becerra), holding that California’s tyrannical ban on so-called “assault weapons” is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. The opinion, along with other filings in this case, can be viewed at AssaultWeaponLawsuit.com.

In 2019, FPC developed and filed Miller v. Becerra, a federal Second Amendment challenge to California’s Assault Weapons Control Act (AWCA) ban on common semiautomatic arms with certain characteristics, including those with ammunition magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds. Throughout the lawsuit, FPC argued that the State’s ban prohibits arms that are constitutionally protected, no more lethal than other certain arms that are not banned, and commonly possessed and used for lawful purposes in the vast majority of the United States.
In the opinion, the Court ruled that many categories of firearms California bans as so-called “assault weapons” are protected by the Second Amendment, and that “[t]he Second Amendment stands as a shield from government imposition of that policy.”
~Snip~
“In his order today, Judge Benitez held what millions of Americans already know to be true: Bans on so-called ‘assault weapons’ are unconstitutional and cannot stand,” said FPC President Brandon Combs. “This historic victory for individual liberty is just the beginning, and FPC will continue to aggressively challenge these laws throughout the United States. We look forward to continuing this challenge at the Ninth Circuit and, should it be necessary, the Supreme Court.”

Comment:
These arguments of the Progressive Marxist/DSA Democrat Commie left ignore the fact that the very rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution for armed citizens, are the very same sections that allow armed cops and soldiers.

How is communism associated with the decision? There's no mention of a communist takeover to justify the weapons.

For what would your average citizen use that weapon for "lawful purposes".?

The guns are to PREVENT a communist takeover.

Duh.

Well, I've used my guns for pest control, killing birds, coyotes, beaver, Antelope, deer, hog, Elk using everything in my collection from 12 gauge, .22 cal, 5.56mm, 6mm, 7.62x39 mm, 30-30 cal and 30.06 including self protection, but I've never shoot a Communist unless it was in Nam and in the bush.
Even then I was using an "Assault Shotgun" in 12 gauge double 00 Buck shot.... gifted to me by a Marine at the Siagon Embassy. But I never used a M-16.
Therefore should all 12 gauge shotguns be banned from civilian use since they were used in battle during WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, Iraq, Afghanistan and now in Syria.

BFD. The Founders wrote the 2nd to deal with an illegitimate government. The Bill of Rights is 9 limitations on what government can do to the individual, and one final option.

 

[Colin norris]

FPC Wins “Assault Weapon” Lawsuit in Historic Victory for Second Amendment Rights​

BREAKING: FPC Wins “Assault Weapon” Lawsuit in Historic Victory for Second Amendment Rights

Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that Judge Roger T. Benitez of the Southern District of California has issued an opinion in Miller v. Bonta (previously Miller v. Becerra), holding that California’s tyrannical ban on so-called “assault weapons” is unconstitutional under the...

www.firearmspolicy.org

4 Jun 2021
SAN DIEGO, CA (June 4, 2021) — Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that Judge Roger T. Benitez of the Southern District of California has issued an opinion in Miller v. Bonta (previously Miller v. Becerra), holding that California’s tyrannical ban on so-called “assault weapons” is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. The opinion, along with other filings in this case, can be viewed at AssaultWeaponLawsuit.com.

In 2019, FPC developed and filed Miller v. Becerra, a federal Second Amendment challenge to California’s Assault Weapons Control Act (AWCA) ban on common semiautomatic arms with certain characteristics, including those with ammunition magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds. Throughout the lawsuit, FPC argued that the State’s ban prohibits arms that are constitutionally protected, no more lethal than other certain arms that are not banned, and commonly possessed and used for lawful purposes in the vast majority of the United States.
In the opinion, the Court ruled that many categories of firearms California bans as so-called “assault weapons” are protected by the Second Amendment, and that “[t]he Second Amendment stands as a shield from government imposition of that policy.”
~Snip~
“In his order today, Judge Benitez held what millions of Americans already know to be true: Bans on so-called ‘assault weapons’ are unconstitutional and cannot stand,” said FPC President Brandon Combs. “This historic victory for individual liberty is just the beginning, and FPC will continue to aggressively challenge these laws throughout the United States. We look forward to continuing this challenge at the Ninth Circuit and, should it be necessary, the Supreme Court.”

Comment:
These arguments of the Progressive Marxist/DSA Democrat Commie left ignore the fact that the very rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution for armed citizens, are the very same sections that allow armed cops and soldiers.

How is communism associated with the decision? There's no mention of a communist takeover to justify the weapons.

For what would your average citizen use that weapon for "lawful purposes".?

The guns are to PREVENT a communist takeover.

Duh.

Well, I've used my guns for pest control, killing birds, coyotes, beaver, Antelope, deer, hog, Elk using everything in my collection from 12 gauge, .22 cal, 5.56mm, 6mm, 7.62x39 mm, 30-30 cal and 30.06 including self protection, but I've never shoot a Communist unless it was in Nam and in the bush.
Even then I was using an "Assault Shotgun" in 12 gauge double 00 Buck shot.... gifted to me by a Marine at the Siagon Embassy. But I never used a M-16.
Therefore should all 12 gauge shotguns be banned from civilian use since they were used in battle during WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, Iraq, Afghanistan and now in Syria.

BFD. The Founders wrote the 2nd to deal with an illegitimate government. The Bill of Rights is 9 limitations on what government can do to the individual, and one final option.

The founders did note do that. At those times for everyone to have th e right to have a gun was basically the country had something to protect itself with.
There was never an intention for illegitimate governments. That favourite catch cry was invented by those who wanted to stock the armoury for ego reasons.

As a Republican, you would have been bellowing about Biden being illegitimate etc. Why haven't you done something about him? No courage of your convictions? You said you have a right under the 2nd to do it so do it. See how good your are against the American military, tough guy.

They also said Obama wasn't even American also. That would have made him illegitimate also but no one fire a shot. The lot of you are all piss and wind.

 

[westwall]

FPC Wins “Assault Weapon” Lawsuit in Historic Victory for Second Amendment Rights​

BREAKING: FPC Wins “Assault Weapon” Lawsuit in Historic Victory for Second Amendment Rights

Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that Judge Roger T. Benitez of the Southern District of California has issued an opinion in Miller v. Bonta (previously Miller v. Becerra), holding that California’s tyrannical ban on so-called “assault weapons” is unconstitutional under the...

www.firearmspolicy.org

4 Jun 2021
SAN DIEGO, CA (June 4, 2021) — Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that Judge Roger T. Benitez of the Southern District of California has issued an opinion in Miller v. Bonta (previously Miller v. Becerra), holding that California’s tyrannical ban on so-called “assault weapons” is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. The opinion, along with other filings in this case, can be viewed at AssaultWeaponLawsuit.com.

In 2019, FPC developed and filed Miller v. Becerra, a federal Second Amendment challenge to California’s Assault Weapons Control Act (AWCA) ban on common semiautomatic arms with certain characteristics, including those with ammunition magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds. Throughout the lawsuit, FPC argued that the State’s ban prohibits arms that are constitutionally protected, no more lethal than other certain arms that are not banned, and commonly possessed and used for lawful purposes in the vast majority of the United States.
In the opinion, the Court ruled that many categories of firearms California bans as so-called “assault weapons” are protected by the Second Amendment, and that “[t]he Second Amendment stands as a shield from government imposition of that policy.”
~Snip~
“In his order today, Judge Benitez held what millions of Americans already know to be true: Bans on so-called ‘assault weapons’ are unconstitutional and cannot stand,” said FPC President Brandon Combs. “This historic victory for individual liberty is just the beginning, and FPC will continue to aggressively challenge these laws throughout the United States. We look forward to continuing this challenge at the Ninth Circuit and, should it be necessary, the Supreme Court.”

Comment:
These arguments of the Progressive Marxist/DSA Democrat Commie left ignore the fact that the very rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution for armed citizens, are the very same sections that allow armed cops and soldiers.

How is communism associated with the decision? There's no mention of a communist takeover to justify the weapons.

For what would your average citizen use that weapon for "lawful purposes".?

The guns are to PREVENT a communist takeover.

Duh.

Well, I've used my guns for pest control, killing birds, coyotes, beaver, Antelope, deer, hog, Elk using everything in my collection from 12 gauge, .22 cal, 5.56mm, 6mm, 7.62x39 mm, 30-30 cal and 30.06 including self protection, but I've never shoot a Communist unless it was in Nam and in the bush.
Even then I was using an "Assault Shotgun" in 12 gauge double 00 Buck shot.... gifted to me by a Marine at the Siagon Embassy. But I never used a M-16.
Therefore should all 12 gauge shotguns be banned from civilian use since they were used in battle during WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, Iraq, Afghanistan and now in Syria.

BFD. The Founders wrote the 2nd to deal with an illegitimate government. The Bill of Rights is 9 limitations on what government can do to the individual, and one final option.

The founders did note do that. At those times for everyone to have th e right to have a gun was basically the country had something to protect itself with.
There was never an intention for illegitimate governments. That favourite catch cry was invented by those who wanted to stock the armoury for ego reasons.

As a Republican, you would have been bellowing about Biden being illegitimate etc. Why haven't you done something about him? No courage of your convictions? You said you have a right under the 2nd to do it so do it. See how good your are against the American military, tough guy.

They also said Obama wasn't even American also. That would have made him illegitimate also but no one fire a shot. The lot of you are all piss and wind.

Thank you for thinking that.

 

[freyasman]

FPC Wins “Assault Weapon” Lawsuit in Historic Victory for Second Amendment Rights​

BREAKING: FPC Wins “Assault Weapon” Lawsuit in Historic Victory for Second Amendment Rights

Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that Judge Roger T. Benitez of the Southern District of California has issued an opinion in Miller v. Bonta (previously Miller v. Becerra), holding that California’s tyrannical ban on so-called “assault weapons” is unconstitutional under the...

www.firearmspolicy.org

4 Jun 2021
SAN DIEGO, CA (June 4, 2021) — Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that Judge Roger T. Benitez of the Southern District of California has issued an opinion in Miller v. Bonta (previously Miller v. Becerra), holding that California’s tyrannical ban on so-called “assault weapons” is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. The opinion, along with other filings in this case, can be viewed at AssaultWeaponLawsuit.com.

In 2019, FPC developed and filed Miller v. Becerra, a federal Second Amendment challenge to California’s Assault Weapons Control Act (AWCA) ban on common semiautomatic arms with certain characteristics, including those with ammunition magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds. Throughout the lawsuit, FPC argued that the State’s ban prohibits arms that are constitutionally protected, no more lethal than other certain arms that are not banned, and commonly possessed and used for lawful purposes in the vast majority of the United States.
In the opinion, the Court ruled that many categories of firearms California bans as so-called “assault weapons” are protected by the Second Amendment, and that “[t]he Second Amendment stands as a shield from government imposition of that policy.”
~Snip~
“In his order today, Judge Benitez held what millions of Americans already know to be true: Bans on so-called ‘assault weapons’ are unconstitutional and cannot stand,” said FPC President Brandon Combs. “This historic victory for individual liberty is just the beginning, and FPC will continue to aggressively challenge these laws throughout the United States. We look forward to continuing this challenge at the Ninth Circuit and, should it be necessary, the Supreme Court.”

Comment:
These arguments of the Progressive Marxist/DSA Democrat Commie left ignore the fact that the very rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution for armed citizens, are the very same sections that allow armed cops and soldiers.

How is communism associated with the decision? There's no mention of a communist takeover to justify the weapons.

For what would your average citizen use that weapon for "lawful purposes".?

An AR-15, or just rifles in general?

The AR-15 is a great gun for home defense versus the shotgun.....and it is also used for hunting...it is good for hunting wild hogs....I am told......and it is used in competition by shooters of all ages and both sexes......

It also helps keep the democrat party terrorist groups, blm and antifa, from burning down your store when they are burning and looting black neighborhoods for the democrat party just before elections.......

You have never used it for defense of your home and never will. That's propaganda. How often do you go hinting hogs? Honestly. Very rarely.
Used in a gun club? Possibly.

As for shooting rioters, that stupid kid found himself in jail when he opened fire on people.

So don't give me your pathetic justifications for ownership. The truth is you have guns because you can. You will never use them for defense because you haven't the guts to go out. Where were you when BLM did their thing? Cowering in the shed?

You guys always do this weak shit..... (smh)

You goad and provoke the hell out of everyone, and anyone who isn't stupid enough to take the bait gets called a coward.
Some young kid who isn't scared to protect himself from an attack (I notice you tried to characterize it as "opening fire" on people, as though he was randomly lighting people up) gets the entire corrupt as fuck judicial system landing on his head, and even though that's supposedly what everyone is rioting about, none of ya'll have a problem with it, because the kid is white, and the attackers were on the team you all are sponsoring.






Do you really think this weak ass, transparent as fuck, manipulation is working?


Or do you think maybe some folks have been noting which of ya'll are all in with this shit, and making lists of all your names and addresses for possible future use?

 

[freyasman]

FPC Wins “Assault Weapon” Lawsuit in Historic Victory for Second Amendment Rights​

BREAKING: FPC Wins “Assault Weapon” Lawsuit in Historic Victory for Second Amendment Rights

Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that Judge Roger T. Benitez of the Southern District of California has issued an opinion in Miller v. Bonta (previously Miller v. Becerra), holding that California’s tyrannical ban on so-called “assault weapons” is unconstitutional under the...

www.firearmspolicy.org

4 Jun 2021
SAN DIEGO, CA (June 4, 2021) — Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that Judge Roger T. Benitez of the Southern District of California has issued an opinion in Miller v. Bonta (previously Miller v. Becerra), holding that California’s tyrannical ban on so-called “assault weapons” is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. The opinion, along with other filings in this case, can be viewed at AssaultWeaponLawsuit.com.

In 2019, FPC developed and filed Miller v. Becerra, a federal Second Amendment challenge to California’s Assault Weapons Control Act (AWCA) ban on common semiautomatic arms with certain characteristics, including those with ammunition magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds. Throughout the lawsuit, FPC argued that the State’s ban prohibits arms that are constitutionally protected, no more lethal than other certain arms that are not banned, and commonly possessed and used for lawful purposes in the vast majority of the United States.
In the opinion, the Court ruled that many categories of firearms California bans as so-called “assault weapons” are protected by the Second Amendment, and that “[t]he Second Amendment stands as a shield from government imposition of that policy.”
~Snip~
“In his order today, Judge Benitez held what millions of Americans already know to be true: Bans on so-called ‘assault weapons’ are unconstitutional and cannot stand,” said FPC President Brandon Combs. “This historic victory for individual liberty is just the beginning, and FPC will continue to aggressively challenge these laws throughout the United States. We look forward to continuing this challenge at the Ninth Circuit and, should it be necessary, the Supreme Court.”

Comment:
These arguments of the Progressive Marxist/DSA Democrat Commie left ignore the fact that the very rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution for armed citizens, are the very same sections that allow armed cops and soldiers.

How is communism associated with the decision? There's no mention of a communist takeover to justify the weapons.

For what would your average citizen use that weapon for "lawful purposes".?

An AR-15, or just rifles in general?

The AR-15 is a great gun for home defense versus the shotgun.....and it is also used for hunting...it is good for hunting wild hogs....I am told......and it is used in competition by shooters of all ages and both sexes......

It also helps keep the democrat party terrorist groups, blm and antifa, from burning down your store when they are burning and looting black neighborhoods for the democrat party just before elections.......

You have never used it for defense of your home and never will. That's propaganda. How often do you go hinting hogs? Honestly. Very rarely.
Used in a gun club? Possibly.

As for shooting rioters, that stupid kid found himself in jail when he opened fire on people.

So don't give me your pathetic justifications for ownership. The truth is you have guns because you can. You will never use them for defense because you haven't the guts to go out. Where were you when BLM did their thing? Cowering in the shed?

If I don't use a rifle, that doesn't mean that millions of others don't use the rifle...are you really this dumb?


Someone I know uses an AR-15 to kill hogs......the ability to follow up is important because they are mean and dangerous.

The store owners who used the AR-15 rifles to keep the democrat party terrrorists in blm and antifa from burning their stores are really glad they had them...

Millions of others do not use thise weapon at all. Like yourself, you have them because you can to inflate your tough guy image and build testosterone.

I never witnessed any store owners mowing people down with automatic weapons and neither did you. You are a liar.

You're digging yourself a hole son. Your excuses don't gel with anything in reality.

So who do you think is looking dumb now? It's certainly not me dickhead.

Yeah, it is.

 

[2aguy]

FPC Wins “Assault Weapon” Lawsuit in Historic Victory for Second Amendment Rights​

BREAKING: FPC Wins “Assault Weapon” Lawsuit in Historic Victory for Second Amendment Rights

Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that Judge Roger T. Benitez of the Southern District of California has issued an opinion in Miller v. Bonta (previously Miller v. Becerra), holding that California’s tyrannical ban on so-called “assault weapons” is unconstitutional under the...

www.firearmspolicy.org

4 Jun 2021
SAN DIEGO, CA (June 4, 2021) — Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that Judge Roger T. Benitez of the Southern District of California has issued an opinion in Miller v. Bonta (previously Miller v. Becerra), holding that California’s tyrannical ban on so-called “assault weapons” is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. The opinion, along with other filings in this case, can be viewed at AssaultWeaponLawsuit.com.

In 2019, FPC developed and filed Miller v. Becerra, a federal Second Amendment challenge to California’s Assault Weapons Control Act (AWCA) ban on common semiautomatic arms with certain characteristics, including those with ammunition magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds. Throughout the lawsuit, FPC argued that the State’s ban prohibits arms that are constitutionally protected, no more lethal than other certain arms that are not banned, and commonly possessed and used for lawful purposes in the vast majority of the United States.
In the opinion, the Court ruled that many categories of firearms California bans as so-called “assault weapons” are protected by the Second Amendment, and that “[t]he Second Amendment stands as a shield from government imposition of that policy.”
~Snip~
“In his order today, Judge Benitez held what millions of Americans already know to be true: Bans on so-called ‘assault weapons’ are unconstitutional and cannot stand,” said FPC President Brandon Combs. “This historic victory for individual liberty is just the beginning, and FPC will continue to aggressively challenge these laws throughout the United States. We look forward to continuing this challenge at the Ninth Circuit and, should it be necessary, the Supreme Court.”

Comment:
These arguments of the Progressive Marxist/DSA Democrat Commie left ignore the fact that the very rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution for armed citizens, are the very same sections that allow armed cops and soldiers.

What’s interesting is this illustrates the dishonesty and hypocrisy of the inconsistent right with regard to “states’ rights” dogma.

Clearly Benitez is a tyrant in black robes, legislating from the bench, ignoring the will of the people of the State of California.

~~~~~~

Record number of first time gun owners in California in response to COVID shutdown, concerns over violence - California Political Review

Guv Newsom and the Democrats are the best advertising for the gun industry. As they allow criminals from foreign nations to roam our streets, refuse to stop riots, looting and burning, people are attacked on the street for supporting the United States, people have two choices. Either leave the...

www.capoliticalreview.com

Much of Benitez’s ruling is ridiculous and childish – comparing the AR 15 to a Swiss Army Knife is truly idiotic.

And whining about ‘the media’ is baseless partisan nonsense.

All Benitez needed to do was cite Miller, as reaffirmed in Heller, that weapons are either ‘in common use’ and entitled to Constitutional protections or ‘dangerous and unusual’ and not within the scope of the Second Amendment – and rule that the AR 15 is ‘in common use’ and therefore entitled to Second Amendment protections.

Benitez’s decision will still be overturned on appeal, but at least it will be a clear, concise decision that may in a few decades make its way to the Supreme Court.

No, comparing it to the Swiss Army knife is accurate....and if you actually read what he said, instead of dismissing what he said without facts, you would know that....

The only reason it will be overturned is because of anti-gun activists ignoring Heller who sit on the 9th circuit........

 

[2aguy]

FPC Wins “Assault Weapon” Lawsuit in Historic Victory for Second Amendment Rights​

BREAKING: FPC Wins “Assault Weapon” Lawsuit in Historic Victory for Second Amendment Rights

Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that Judge Roger T. Benitez of the Southern District of California has issued an opinion in Miller v. Bonta (previously Miller v. Becerra), holding that California’s tyrannical ban on so-called “assault weapons” is unconstitutional under the...

www.firearmspolicy.org

4 Jun 2021
SAN DIEGO, CA (June 4, 2021) — Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that Judge Roger T. Benitez of the Southern District of California has issued an opinion in Miller v. Bonta (previously Miller v. Becerra), holding that California’s tyrannical ban on so-called “assault weapons” is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. The opinion, along with other filings in this case, can be viewed at AssaultWeaponLawsuit.com.

In 2019, FPC developed and filed Miller v. Becerra, a federal Second Amendment challenge to California’s Assault Weapons Control Act (AWCA) ban on common semiautomatic arms with certain characteristics, including those with ammunition magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds. Throughout the lawsuit, FPC argued that the State’s ban prohibits arms that are constitutionally protected, no more lethal than other certain arms that are not banned, and commonly possessed and used for lawful purposes in the vast majority of the United States.
In the opinion, the Court ruled that many categories of firearms California bans as so-called “assault weapons” are protected by the Second Amendment, and that “[t]he Second Amendment stands as a shield from government imposition of that policy.”
~Snip~
“In his order today, Judge Benitez held what millions of Americans already know to be true: Bans on so-called ‘assault weapons’ are unconstitutional and cannot stand,” said FPC President Brandon Combs. “This historic victory for individual liberty is just the beginning, and FPC will continue to aggressively challenge these laws throughout the United States. We look forward to continuing this challenge at the Ninth Circuit and, should it be necessary, the Supreme Court.”

Comment:
These arguments of the Progressive Marxist/DSA Democrat Commie left ignore the fact that the very rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution for armed citizens, are the very same sections that allow armed cops and soldiers.

How is communism associated with the decision? There's no mention of a communist takeover to justify the weapons.

For what would your average citizen use that weapon for "lawful purposes".?

An AR-15, or just rifles in general?

The AR-15 is a great gun for home defense versus the shotgun.....and it is also used for hunting...it is good for hunting wild hogs....I am told......and it is used in competition by shooters of all ages and both sexes......

It also helps keep the democrat party terrorist groups, blm and antifa, from burning down your store when they are burning and looting black neighborhoods for the democrat party just before elections.......

You have never used it for defense of your home and never will. That's propaganda. How often do you go hinting hogs? Honestly. Very rarely.
Used in a gun club? Possibly.

As for shooting rioters, that stupid kid found himself in jail when he opened fire on people.

So don't give me your pathetic justifications for ownership. The truth is you have guns because you can. You will never use them for defense because you haven't the guts to go out. Where were you when BLM did their thing? Cowering in the shed?

If I don't use a rifle, that doesn't mean that millions of others don't use the rifle...are you really this dumb?


Someone I know uses an AR-15 to kill hogs......the ability to follow up is important because they are mean and dangerous.

The store owners who used the AR-15 rifles to keep the democrat party terrrorists in blm and antifa from burning their stores are really glad they had them...

Millions of others do not use thise weapon at all. Like yourself, you have them because you can to inflate your tough guy image and build testosterone.

I never witnessed any store owners mowing people down with automatic weapons and neither did you. You are a liar.

You're digging yourself a hole son. Your excuses don't gel with anything in reality.

So who do you think is looking dumb now? It's certainly not me dickhead.

You truly are a child...

It was the mere presence of store owners armed with AR-15s that kept the democrat party terrorists in blm and antifa from burning and looting their stores and murdering their employees....you idiot.....they didn't have to shoot anyone.....it was the mere existence of those weapons and the ability to use them that stopped the democrat party terrorists in blm and antifa from engaging in burning, looting and murder...

They were a decisive deterrent against the democrat party....

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Gruesome Newsom is pissed!!

Everyone on the Left who does not respect the role of 2A will hate this as well. Newsome will spare no expense to appeal. SCOTUS has already added another 2A case to this term's docket. That question is an appeal against NY state's imposition of frivolous requirements to impede citizens who want to conceal carry.

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

Translation: the government should only have firearms
Nazi Brownshirts also believed that

 

[bigrebnc1775]

FPC Wins “Assault Weapon” Lawsuit in Historic Victory for Second Amendment Rights​

BREAKING: FPC Wins “Assault Weapon” Lawsuit in Historic Victory for Second Amendment Rights

Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that Judge Roger T. Benitez of the Southern District of California has issued an opinion in Miller v. Bonta (previously Miller v. Becerra), holding that California’s tyrannical ban on so-called “assault weapons” is unconstitutional under the...

www.firearmspolicy.org

4 Jun 2021
SAN DIEGO, CA (June 4, 2021) — Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that Judge Roger T. Benitez of the Southern District of California has issued an opinion in Miller v. Bonta (previously Miller v. Becerra), holding that California’s tyrannical ban on so-called “assault weapons” is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. The opinion, along with other filings in this case, can be viewed at AssaultWeaponLawsuit.com.

In 2019, FPC developed and filed Miller v. Becerra, a federal Second Amendment challenge to California’s Assault Weapons Control Act (AWCA) ban on common semiautomatic arms with certain characteristics, including those with ammunition magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds. Throughout the lawsuit, FPC argued that the State’s ban prohibits arms that are constitutionally protected, no more lethal than other certain arms that are not banned, and commonly possessed and used for lawful purposes in the vast majority of the United States.
In the opinion, the Court ruled that many categories of firearms California bans as so-called “assault weapons” are protected by the Second Amendment, and that “[t]he Second Amendment stands as a shield from government imposition of that policy.”
~Snip~
“In his order today, Judge Benitez held what millions of Americans already know to be true: Bans on so-called ‘assault weapons’ are unconstitutional and cannot stand,” said FPC President Brandon Combs. “This historic victory for individual liberty is just the beginning, and FPC will continue to aggressively challenge these laws throughout the United States. We look forward to continuing this challenge at the Ninth Circuit and, should it be necessary, the Supreme Court.”

Comment:
These arguments of the Progressive Marxist/DSA Democrat Commie left ignore the fact that the very rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution for armed citizens, are the very same sections that allow armed cops and soldiers.

What’s interesting is this illustrates the dishonesty and hypocrisy of the inconsistent right with regard to “states’ rights” dogma.

Clearly Benitez is a tyrant in black robes, legislating from the bench, ignoring the will of the people of the State of California.

Interesting that you just tried to say the 14th amendment doesn't exist
How about those democrat jim crow laws?
Benitez is a Constitutionalist whose parents came from Castor's Cuba who saw what a tyrant will do with a disarmed populous

 

[bigrebnc1775]

These arguments of the Progressive Marxist/DSA Democrat Commie left ignore the fact that the very rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution for armed citizens, are the very same sections that allow armed cops and soldiers.

This is a lie – both ignorant and wrong.

what you wrote is the lie try again

 

[Blues Man]

FPC Wins “Assault Weapon” Lawsuit in Historic Victory for Second Amendment Rights​

BREAKING: FPC Wins “Assault Weapon” Lawsuit in Historic Victory for Second Amendment Rights

Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that Judge Roger T. Benitez of the Southern District of California has issued an opinion in Miller v. Bonta (previously Miller v. Becerra), holding that California’s tyrannical ban on so-called “assault weapons” is unconstitutional under the...

www.firearmspolicy.org

4 Jun 2021
SAN DIEGO, CA (June 4, 2021) — Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that Judge Roger T. Benitez of the Southern District of California has issued an opinion in Miller v. Bonta (previously Miller v. Becerra), holding that California’s tyrannical ban on so-called “assault weapons” is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. The opinion, along with other filings in this case, can be viewed at AssaultWeaponLawsuit.com.

In 2019, FPC developed and filed Miller v. Becerra, a federal Second Amendment challenge to California’s Assault Weapons Control Act (AWCA) ban on common semiautomatic arms with certain characteristics, including those with ammunition magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds. Throughout the lawsuit, FPC argued that the State’s ban prohibits arms that are constitutionally protected, no more lethal than other certain arms that are not banned, and commonly possessed and used for lawful purposes in the vast majority of the United States.
In the opinion, the Court ruled that many categories of firearms California bans as so-called “assault weapons” are protected by the Second Amendment, and that “[t]he Second Amendment stands as a shield from government imposition of that policy.”
~Snip~
“In his order today, Judge Benitez held what millions of Americans already know to be true: Bans on so-called ‘assault weapons’ are unconstitutional and cannot stand,” said FPC President Brandon Combs. “This historic victory for individual liberty is just the beginning, and FPC will continue to aggressively challenge these laws throughout the United States. We look forward to continuing this challenge at the Ninth Circuit and, should it be necessary, the Supreme Court.”

Comment:
These arguments of the Progressive Marxist/DSA Democrat Commie left ignore the fact that the very rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution for armed citizens, are the very same sections that allow armed cops and soldiers.

How is communism associated with the decision? There's no mention of a communist takeover to justify the weapons.

For what would your average citizen use that weapon for "lawful purposes".?

An AR-15, or just rifles in general?

The AR-15 is a great gun for home defense versus the shotgun.....and it is also used for hunting...it is good for hunting wild hogs....I am told......and it is used in competition by shooters of all ages and both sexes......

It also helps keep the democrat party terrorist groups, blm and antifa, from burning down your store when they are burning and looting black neighborhoods for the democrat party just before elections.......

You have never used it for defense of your home and never will. That's propaganda. How often do you go hinting hogs? Honestly. Very rarely.
Used in a gun club? Possibly.

As for shooting rioters, that stupid kid found himself in jail when he opened fire on people.

So don't give me your pathetic justifications for ownership. The truth is you have guns because you can. You will never use them for defense because you haven't the guts to go out. Where were you when BLM did their thing? Cowering in the shed?

Semiautomatic rifles have been available to the public for over a century. An AR 15 is just another small caliber semiautomatic rifle.

Stop pretending it's more than that

 

[danielpalos]

Gruesome Newsom is pissed!!

Everyone on the Left who does not respect the role of 2A will hate this as well. Newsome will spare no expense to appeal. SCOTUS has already added another 2A case to this term's docket. That question is an appeal against NY state's imposition of frivolous requirements to impede citizens who want to conceal carry.

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

Translation: the government should only have firearms
Nazi Brownshirts also believed that

However, did you reach that conclusion besides right-wing fantasy?

I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on
Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

 

[bigrebnc1775]

FPC Wins “Assault Weapon” Lawsuit in Historic Victory for Second Amendment Rights​

BREAKING: FPC Wins “Assault Weapon” Lawsuit in Historic Victory for Second Amendment Rights

Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that Judge Roger T. Benitez of the Southern District of California has issued an opinion in Miller v. Bonta (previously Miller v. Becerra), holding that California’s tyrannical ban on so-called “assault weapons” is unconstitutional under the...

www.firearmspolicy.org

4 Jun 2021
SAN DIEGO, CA (June 4, 2021) — Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that Judge Roger T. Benitez of the Southern District of California has issued an opinion in Miller v. Bonta (previously Miller v. Becerra), holding that California’s tyrannical ban on so-called “assault weapons” is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. The opinion, along with other filings in this case, can be viewed at AssaultWeaponLawsuit.com.

In 2019, FPC developed and filed Miller v. Becerra, a federal Second Amendment challenge to California’s Assault Weapons Control Act (AWCA) ban on common semiautomatic arms with certain characteristics, including those with ammunition magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds. Throughout the lawsuit, FPC argued that the State’s ban prohibits arms that are constitutionally protected, no more lethal than other certain arms that are not banned, and commonly possessed and used for lawful purposes in the vast majority of the United States.
In the opinion, the Court ruled that many categories of firearms California bans as so-called “assault weapons” are protected by the Second Amendment, and that “[t]he Second Amendment stands as a shield from government imposition of that policy.”
~Snip~
“In his order today, Judge Benitez held what millions of Americans already know to be true: Bans on so-called ‘assault weapons’ are unconstitutional and cannot stand,” said FPC President Brandon Combs. “This historic victory for individual liberty is just the beginning, and FPC will continue to aggressively challenge these laws throughout the United States. We look forward to continuing this challenge at the Ninth Circuit and, should it be necessary, the Supreme Court.”

Comment:
These arguments of the Progressive Marxist/DSA Democrat Commie left ignore the fact that the very rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution for armed citizens, are the very same sections that allow armed cops and soldiers.

How is communism associated with the decision? There's no mention of a communist takeover to justify the weapons.

For what would your average citizen use that weapon for "lawful purposes".?

An AR-15, or just rifles in general?

The AR-15 is a great gun for home defense versus the shotgun.....and it is also used for hunting...it is good for hunting wild hogs....I am told......and it is used in competition by shooters of all ages and both sexes......

It also helps keep the democrat party terrorist groups, blm and antifa, from burning down your store when they are burning and looting black neighborhoods for the democrat party just before elections.......

You have never used it for defense of your home and never will. That's propaganda. How often do you go hinting hogs? Honestly. Very rarely.
Used in a gun club? Possibly.

As for shooting rioters, that stupid kid found himself in jail when he opened fire on people.

So don't give me your pathetic justifications for ownership. The truth is you have guns because you can. You will never use them for defense because you haven't the guts to go out. Where were you when BLM did their thing? Cowering in the shed?

interesting when did you start predicting the future?
Bring Kyle Rittenhouse case to a more constitutional friendly state and the outcome will be ruled differently unlike the thug tyrannical state he was in.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Gruesome Newsom is pissed!!

Everyone on the Left who does not respect the role of 2A will hate this as well. Newsome will spare no expense to appeal. SCOTUS has already added another 2A case to this term's docket. That question is an appeal against NY state's imposition of frivolous requirements to impede citizens who want to conceal carry.

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

Translation: the government should only have firearms
Nazi Brownshirts also believed that

However, did you reach that conclusion besides right-wing fantasy?

I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on
Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

George Mason was right you on the other hand are so far left of the issue you need to stay away maybe go back to making tacos