http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-guns-idUSKCN0Z61JE The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday left in place gun control laws in New York and Connecticut that ban military-style assault weapons like the one used in last week's massacre at an Orlando nightclub, rejecting a legal challenge by gun rights advocates.... ______________________________________ And there it is....the death of the NRA
Such would require the supreme court to actually agree to hear such a case, and rule in favor of the states and their restrictions, essentially overturning both Heller and McDonald at the same time.
There is no overturning necessary. The right to keep a gun in your home for self defense does not mean everybody gets a gun; everybody gets to control what kind of gun they have; and everybody gets unlimited magazines.
Given the court's composition and the fact that a 4-4 decision allows the prior ruling to stand, I'm surprised the liberals on the court didn't snatch this one up -- it only takes 4 to grant cert. They're likely afraid that Trump will appoint a conservative, the case - left in limbo and therefore in need of resolution - will be re-heard, and the ban overturned.
How? Those laws have been in place for about 15 years. The NRA has been doing pretty well since then.
He used two guns. Neither were assault weapons. No matter how often the claim is made or will be made, those were never assault weapons. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...rlando-high-capacity-common-weapons/85887260/
Compared to California, the laws on the books at CT are almost very kind. The word ban gets loosely used by Democrats. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Connecticut#State_constitutional_provisions
You claimed that the supreme court not choosing to hear the appeal, when their current makeup would undoubtedly result in a four-to-four split with no resolution, amounted to the death of the NRA. It would take far more than the above to actually achieve that goal.
only takes the vote of 4 justices to take a case. I guess at least one of the 4 Conservatives believes that the States should have the authority to ban certain gun features.
And what would the reason be for taking up a case that would result in a tie decision, that would ultimately have no relevant bearing? - - - Updated - - - Pray tell which cases? The ones they chose to hear before the death of Antonin Scalia, which left them without a deciding verdict, and no way of deciding that they could change their mind and not hear them?
I am not finished with NY state yet but in CT, the law is not as draconian. I was led to believe they ban semi automatics. Actually they kept a grandfather clause.
ban all semi-automatics??? of course not. many semi-automatic rifles and shotguns are still allowed. including ones that are basicly an AR minus the offensive attachments.
