Miller v. Bonta 9th Ckt "assault weapons": Held for Duncan result 1-26-24

[abinsinia]

Hey guy! Are you aware that on a muzzle loader the barrel was considered an assesory to the gun,

Consistent with this corpus
linguistics analysis, the various accessories listed in Penal Code section 30515—
and a shortened barrel that could be used to render a semiautomatic centerfire rifle less than 30 inches in length—are not bearable “arms” as the term was understood when the Second and Fourteenth Amendments were ratified.

I guess you can just take a muzzle loaders barrel aware and it work just great! That's the original understanding !!

[taperxz]

Hey guy! Are you aware that on a muzzle loader the barrel was considered an assesory to the gun,



I guess you can just take a muzzle loaders barrel aware and it work just great! That's the original understanding !!

Muzzle loaders are covered. Ramrods to load them is an accessory and not covered under the 2A because they can still own the muzzle loading firearm. There is no 2A infringement. The ramrod isn’t a firearm

[Sputnik]

It would seem they are attempting to completely re-define the law into something it never was.
They wanted to ban "assault weapons".
People found a way to keep their rifles.
Now that we have a real foothold to repeal the ban suddenly they say they never wanted to ban "assault weapons" just some "accessories"...
the goalposts are moving so fast I'm getting dizzy.

[curtisfong]

https://assets.nationbuilder.com/fir...pdf?1667019830

Just as the historical analogues singled out specific
weapons for regulation while leaving alternative weapons available for effective
self-defense, the AWCA merely restricts the use of certain combat-oriented
accessories with certain firearms and does not prohibit possession of those
underlying firearms, such as featureless AR-platform rifles, or a range of other
firearms that may be used for self-defense

Uh what?

[TheNinja]

Uh what?

Combat oriented accessories??? Like a proper grip on my AR that actually makes it safer to control? That's a combat oriented accessory?

[curtisfong]

Combat oriented accessories??? Like a proper grip on my AR that actually makes it safer to control? That's a combat oriented accessory?

And if a folding stock on a rifle makes it evil, preventing it from being shouldered, how does a fixed stock on a pistol make it evil by allowing it to be shouldered (also making it safer to control)?

[BAJ475]

How do these people breath with their heads so far up their butts?

[abinsinia]

they keep trying to conflate that the protected weapons are only the ones used for self defense , and that's a house of card since it's clearly not that Bruen says.

Also it's damming their roster case because the roster bans 90% of handguns which are heavily used for self defense. They also make this claim in their reply.

[rewireroy]

Uh what?

And the follow up to that was in plaintiffs brief, it entirely legal to own pistol grips, flash hiders and adjustable stocks but the law makes them illegal when attached to a firearm creating a new class of arm per CA PC.

If you can own combat-oriented accessories, then so goes the logic that you can strap them to a stripped lower and semi auto upper.

You cant claim the law outlaws the "accessories" but only when building a firearm and if that was the case, the parts would be treated like NFA items where possession on its own is illegal, not when assembled.

[curtisfong]

How do these people breath with their heads so far up their butts?

They're accustomed to Judges like Josephine Staton being just as (if not more) stupid. Sad that we're entirely depending on Benitez.

[jcwatchdog]

they keep trying to conflate that the protected weapons are only the ones used for self defense , and that's a house of card since it's clearly not that Bruen says.

Also it's damming their roster case because the roster bans 90% of handguns which are heavily used for self defense. They also make this claim in their reply.

But then they basically say people can still use featureless ARs for self defense. So which is it? Are ARs useful for self defense or aren’t they?

I’d say using a featureless AR for self defense is less common than a featured one since most of the featureless junk is just for California and maybe some other states.

[Mute]

These fricking people...I suppose a trigger is a "combat oriented" accessory. I'm pretty sure I lost some brain cells reading this vapid, tortured tripe. SMDH!

[ritter]

Accessories? I challenge Bonta to make an AR15 functionable and able to hit a target for self defense without the grip and stock it was designed with to prove to the court those are merely accessories and not integral parts of the firearm.

[pbreed]

What has self defense got to do with it, you left off
and other lawful purposes....

[cleonard]

There are so many things in the states rebuttal that are on shaky ground. The biggie is the reliance on self defense. I don't see that in the second amendment. I see military purposes instead.

It just goes on from there. It cites many other areas of gun law that are already under attack via Buren. Calling a magazine an accoutrement? That's rich. It's a big house of cards.



Sent from my moto g stylus 5G using Tapatalk