{"id":180448,"date":"2017-02-28T19:50:07","date_gmt":"2017-03-01T00:50:07","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/lethal-weapons-of-war-vice-news\/"},"modified":"2017-02-28T19:50:07","modified_gmt":"2017-03-01T00:50:07","slug":"lethal-weapons-of-war-vice-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/second-amendment\/lethal-weapons-of-war-vice-news\/","title":{"rendered":"Lethal weapons of war &#8211; VICE News"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><p>    A federal appeals court upheld Marylands ban on popular    AR-15-style assault weapons and high-capacity magazines last    week, delivering a significant win to gun-control advocates who    argue that the Second Amendment does not apply to    military-style weapons.  <\/p>\n<p>    Marylands ban, enacted in 2013 soon after the Sandy Hook    Elementary School massacre, was allowed to stand in a 10-4    decision by the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond,    Virginia, that ruled the Second Amendment does not protect what    the judges called exceptionally lethal weapons of war.  <\/p>\n<p>    While the ruling is the fifth to uphold a state ban on    assault weapons, according to     The Trace, the Virginia federal appeals    court is the highest yet to affirm a standard for classifying    assault weapons, one gun advocates say will significantly    narrow the scope of the Second Amendment. And one    of the lawyers who brought the case now has set his sights on    the Supreme Court.  <\/p>\n<p>    It is absurd to hold that the most popular    rifle in America is not a protected arm under the Second    Amendment, Jennifer Baker, director of public affairs for the    National Rifle Association, said in a statement. The Second    Amendment protects arms that are in common use at the time for    lawful purposes like self-defense.  <\/p>\n<p>    Like all constitutional rights, the Second Amendment is    limited. For instance, civilians cant buy automatic weapons,    like machine guns. But now seven states and the District of    Columbia have enacted laws banning military-style automatic    weapons like the AR-15, a version of which was used in the    Sandy Hook massacre  which took the lives of 26 people, mostly    children  and the shooting at the Pulse nightclub in Florida,    where 49 were killed and 53 wounded.  <\/p>\n<p>    In the past, circuit courts have relied on how common a weapon    is when determining if its covered by the Second Amendment,    according to Hannah Shearer, an attorney with the Law Center    for Gun Violence Prevention. But with the 4th Circuit ruling,    the judges gave new credence to a second standard: if a weapon    could cause military-level destruction.  <\/p>\n<p>    The AR-15, the Maryland ruling majority opinion reads, is    simply the semiautomatic version of the M16 rifle used by our    military and around the world. That deadly ancestry, according    to the opinion, means that the Supreme Court excludes    AR-15-type rifles and firearms like it from the Second    Amendment.  <\/p>\n<p>    Those AR-15-style rifles are some of the most popular firearms    among U.S. consumers today.  <\/p>\n<p>    [Under the ruling,] the Second Amendment doesnt even apply to    the most common and popular semiautomatic rifles being sold    today, said Jay Porter, one of the attorneys representing the    plaintiffs in the Maryland case. Its absurd.  <\/p>\n<p>    But some gun control advocates say the common use standard    alone is insufficient.  <\/p>\n<p>    It would suggest that if the gun industry floods the market    with an extremely dangerous destructive weapon, if they can    flood the market quick enough before legislatures begin banning    this product, then theres nothing a legislature can do about    it because all of a [sudden] those products are in common    use, said attorney Jon Lowry, director of the Brady Center to    Fight Gun Violence Legal Action Project.  <\/p>\n<p>    The common use test comes out of a 2008 Supreme Court    decision, District of Columbia v    Heller. If a gun is in common use for    law-abiding purposes, the test goes, then its protected by the    Second Amendment. But in its Heller ruling, the Supreme Court    introduced a second caveat: Weapons that are most    useful in military service  M-16 rifles and the like  may be    banned.  <\/p>\n<p>    Besides outlawing the ownership of a class of assault weapons     including semiautomatic rifles with detachable magazines and    pistol grips  the Maryland law also prohibits the sale and    transfer of large-capacity magazines, which typically hold more    than 10 rounds.  <\/p>\n<p>    Gun lobby groups, however, have     long argued that semiautomatic weapons    are constitutionally protected.  <\/p>\n<p>    But in the majority opinion, the federal appeals court    judges reason that the difference between automatic and    semiautomatic fire is only a matter of seconds between rounds.    Instead, they emphasized high-capacity magazines and assault    weapons ability to turn clubs and school into battlegrounds    and their use in massacres from San Bernardino,    California, to the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida.  <\/p>\n<p>    While only 11 percent of mass shootings between January    2009 and July 2015 involved high-capacity magazines  or    assault weapons equipped with them  those shootings tended to    be much deadlier than those committed with other    firearms,     according to the gun control group    Everytown for Gun Safety.  <\/p>\n<p>    This opinion rested its reasoning on the facts of whats    happening when people who shouldnt have them get ahold of    weapons that were designed for military use and inflict horror    and terror in public spaces, said Shearer. So in that    respect, it provides an original blueprint for looking at those    social problems and coming up with solutions for commonsense    gun laws.  <\/p>\n<p>    And that focus on military-level lethality, instead of    commonality, is what lawyers across the aisle say might be the    rulings greatest, or most misguided, legacy. Ultimately    though, its anyones guess how many courts will follow the 4th    Circuits lead. Or if theyll get the chance.  <\/p>\n<p>    In the past, lawyers who represented the plaintiffs in state    assault weapon cases didnt always send rulings to the Supreme    Court for review, but Porter said he will. Basing an entire    ruling on one half of a sentence in a Supreme Court case, he    said, is not enough to restrict a constitutional right.  <\/p>\n<p>    The real point is that no other court has done anything like    this. Not even close, he said. [This is] the type of case    that the Supreme Court should take, must take maybe will    take.  <\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><!-- Auto Generated --><\/p>\n<p>Read this article:<br \/>\n<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/news.vice.com\/story\/this-test-could-redefine-what-weapons-are-protected-by-the-second-amendment\" title=\"Lethal weapons of war - VICE News\">Lethal weapons of war - VICE News<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p> A federal appeals court upheld Marylands ban on popular AR-15-style assault weapons and high-capacity magazines last week, delivering a significant win to gun-control advocates who argue that the Second Amendment does not apply to military-style weapons. Marylands ban, enacted in 2013 soon after the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre, was allowed to stand in a 10-4 decision by the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia, that ruled the Second Amendment does not protect what the judges called exceptionally lethal weapons of war. While the ruling is the fifth to uphold a state ban on assault weapons, according to The Trace, the Virginia federal appeals court is the highest yet to affirm a standard for classifying assault weapons, one gun advocates say will significantly narrow the scope of the Second Amendment.  <a href=\"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/second-amendment\/lethal-weapons-of-war-vice-news\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":5,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[193621],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-180448","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-second-amendment"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/180448"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/5"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=180448"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/180448\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=180448"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=180448"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=180448"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}