The Illinois ‘assault weapon’ ban fails

The Heller, McDonald and Bruen decisions made clear the Second Amendment acknowledges– does not grant–an individual right to keep and bear arms, a right that does not end at one’s property line, and encompasses weapons—not just firearms–in common use for lawful purposes such as self-defense. Government may not erect arbitrary barriers to the exercise of the right, but because the Supreme Court hasn’t absolutely delineated what weapons in “common use” might be, blue states like Illinois remain determined to disarm Americans, the better to crush them when it’s time for the glorious revolution.

 

Graphic: X Screenshot

Among the most common contemporary targets of anti-liberty/gun cracktivists are “assault weapons” and “high capacity” magazines. That there is no such thing as an “assault weapon” deters them not. Neither does the fact magazine capacity restrictions produce no public safety benefit, and most contemporary handguns and rifles feature magazines of greater than their commonly imposed 10 round capacity. Cracktivists have hit on the most common and popular sporting rifle, the AR-15 family, which since the Vietnam War has featured a standard 30 round magazine, as a particular object of hate. Upholding the narrative, Illinois banned “assault weapons” and high-capacity magazines.

An ”assault weapon” is best understood as any scary looking gun cracktivists want to ban. True assault rifles are fully automatic military arms. AR-15s outwardly resemble the military M4 but are like all other semiautomatic arms: they fire one round for each function of the trigger.

Don’t anti-liberty/gun crackvisits know this? Of course they do, but they also know they have unlimited taxpayer funds for lawsuits which normally take years to wend their way to the Supreme Court and in the meantime, they get to deprive Americans of their rights and even jail and ruin some of their political enemies.

Fortunately, U.S. District Court Judge Stephen McGlynn has sided with the Constitution, and overturned the Illinois ban:

… the Court holds that the Plaintiffs have met their burden to demonstrate that the AR-15 and other AR-style weapons are protected “Arms” within the definition advanced by the Seventh Circuit in Friedman and Bevis. Additionally, the Court holds that the various other “assault weapons” proscribed by PICA (including AK-type weapons, various semiautomatic shotguns, and what the Government calls “submachineguns”) are also “Arms,” as are the thirty-round large capacity magazines and various firearm attachments designated by PICA. To reiterate, all of these weapons, magazines, and attachments are bearable, not dangerous or unusual, and are in common use. Moreover, they are all possessed for lawful self-defense purposes, are either not predominately useful for military service or are dual-use items, and are not possessed for unlawful purposes.

Oddly, McGlynn appears to be unaware of the reality of other, related issues:

McGlynn, however, concluded that “.50 caliber ammunition and weapons restricted by PICA are not ‘Arms’ as they are not in common use for self-defense” and therefore “Illinois can lawfully ban .50 caliber weapons and ammunition.” along with belt-fed weapons and grenade launchers.

Banning arms because of their caliber is an odd way to run a judiciary. The .50 BMG round and rifles that fire it are also in common use for sporting purposes, though not for self-defense. The cartridge and its rifles are also clearly dual use. Does this mean the common .45-70 cartridge commonly used in lever action rifles might be banned? Is bullet diameter the determining factor? Cartridges like the .50 Beowolf will function in an AR with an appropriate magazine and upper receiver.

In the meantime, Illinois has already appealed the decision, so the long journey to the Supreme Court continues, though there may be a shortcut:

While the nearly half-dozen lawsuits challenging PICA [the Illinois ban] are moving to the Seventh Circuit, the Supreme Court will be considering granting cert to a lawsuit challenging Maryland’s ban on “assault weapons” next month, and McGlynn’s decision may also prove persuasive to the justices.

If the Court does grant cert in Snope v. Brown we could see a decision released sometime next year, and it’s entirely possible that by next Thanksgiving “assault weapon” bans will officially be unconstitutional; not just in Illinois and Maryland, but in all 50 states.

The Illinois ban, like the decade-long Clinton gun ban, has, and will, do nothing for public safety. Chicago alone has a criminal violence problem like that of third world war zones, virtually none of which involves “assault weapons,” and less than none involve .50 caliber firearms. Attribute that part of McGlynn’s decision to an all-too common lack of gun knowledge among legislators and judges.

That will be an issue for the Supreme Court to resolve after more all-encompassing liberties are secured. One positive, constitutional, thing at a time