Washington (AFP) – The US Supreme Court appeared on Monday to back lawmakers who want to restrict the type of guns such as semi-automatic assault weapons used in recent mass shootings.
In a 7-2 vote, the high court’s justices refused to take up a challenge to a Chicago suburb’s ban on the sale or possession of semi-automatic weapons or high-capacity magazines with more than 10 rounds of ammunition.
The court’s move is a small victory for activists against the spread of such guns, which can potentially kill many people in a short period of time.
“By rejecting this case, today the Supreme Court sided with a community that has taken action to protect itself from the type of violence we’ve seen in San Bernardino, on college campuses and in movie theaters,” said Dan Gross, president of the Brady Center and Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.
Just last week, a husband and wife who authorities say had been radicalized for “quite some time” cut down 14 people and wounded another 21 in San Bernardino, California using legally purchased semi-automatic rifles.
Pediatrician Arie Friedman and the pro-gun Illinois State Rifle Association filed suit, saying his Second Amendment rights to bear arms under the US Constitution had been violated by the city of Highland Park’s ban.
Friedman took his challenge to the Supreme Court after losing in lower courts.
Conservative justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia, writing for the dissent, said they would have taken up the challenge.
“Roughly five million Americans own AR-style semiautomatic rifles,” Thomas wrote in a six-page dissent.
“The overwhelming majority of citizens who own and use such rifles do so for lawful purposes, including self-defense and target shooting.”
The justices have shied from weighing in on state and local disputes on gun rights in recent years.
http://news.yahoo.com/us-supreme-court-gives-nod-assault-weapons-ban-232230175.html
Semi-automatics are NOT assault weapons per-se….Misleading title…
LEARN ENGLISH. Words mean things. NOT infinitely malleable.
You’re technically correct that a semi-auto rifle isn’t an “assault rifle” (or “assault weapon”), but in all honesty, the difference is moot. You can still kill a lot of people with a semi-auto rifle just as easily as with a select-fire rifle.
In fact, full-auto or burst fire from a rifle is LESS effective than rapid semi-auto fire in the hands of any reasonably skilled shooter. Full-auto rifles were developed for poorly-trained conscripts who were taught to rely on massed fire to achieve hits.
Besides, even if spraying ‘n’ praying were deadlier than aiming, that wouldn’t be a valid argument for the anti-gun crowd to use against us. We have the right to own these weapons precisely *because* of their military utility.
I guess my point is that we shouldn’t shrink from the label “assault weapons,” even if the anti-gunners intend that as a propaganda term. We should instead emphasize the true purpose of the Second Amendment and point out that citizens have the right to own firearms of ANY kind as a check on excessive government power.
Nice info for the masses. Semi auto is much more accurate than full because of muzzle rise. That is the reason for the brake.
If you watch the media videos they all show the “enemy” holding implements above their heads or blindly spraying and praying around corners,
These people would be easy pickings for any Kentucky farm boy or Texas rancher with a remington 700, which has the highest number of implements that are in circulation.
The title IS misleading
The SC simply didn’t rule
It passed it over , actually they “refused”
Thus it is of no concern at this time or any time for that matter
If the SC goes against our constitution it than becomes tyrannical in its own right and thus becomes irrelevant in the eyes of the Republic
The time if they so choose to give it to this nonsense , will be the time we the people gauge our SC for its further necessity within our , yes we the people’s government
Better chose wisely old hags , it is us young ones that will be feeling out your further usefulness or weather we would feel we need to follow you any further
My right to self defense isn’t something we should ever allow another person to question
No matter age , nobility , title or false reverence