Machine guns are atypical weapons not protected by the Second Amendment because a reasonable person would not expect them to be used in militia service, the federal government argued Wednesday before an appeals panel.
The government defended federal statute 18 U.S.C. 992(o), which criminalizes possession of a machine gun, as it sought to uphold a conviction against Jaquan Bridges, who pleaded guilty to the offense after a 2023 shootout with police on a Tennessee interstate highway.
Bridges was arrested with a Glock .40 caliber pistol with an attachment that converted the handgun into a machine gun, but fought to dismiss the charge on constitutional grounds.
He claimed the 2022 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen required dismissal of the charge because machine guns fall under the definition of “arms” used in the Second Amendment.
U.S. District Judge John Fowlkes Jr. disagreed, and cited the 2008 Supreme Court decision in District of Columbia v. Heller in his decision to deny the dismissal motion.
— Kevin Koeninger in Feds insist Second Amendment doesn’t protect machine guns
a reasonable person would not expect them [machine guns] to be used in militia service
Uh, I believe the National Guard, which is what became of the State Militias, are issued select fire weapons, and Miller held that arms that are in use by the military/militia are protected [technically, they “found” that short barrel shotguns were not in use by the military [false, even at the time], and therefore were not protected. It follows that if an arm is in use by the military, then it is protected]
SMH
Q: What’s a “reasonable” person?
A: Somebody who agrees with the state.
Reasonable is what the left says it is at any particular time.
The “gun community” agrees with the Department of Justice. When the speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, asked for machine guns to be used against protesters she didn’t like.
The “gun community” was as quiet as a church mouse.
You would think that when the third person in line to be president, wanted “military firepower” used against protesters, more people would speak up. But they didn’t.
And when black teenagers are open carrying machine guns. They get no support from the “gun community.”
The “gun community” is happy that mostly only rich white people, can afford to own machine guns.
I am not a hunter. And the second amendment was not written so you could go hunting.
Now what so called “gun civil rights” organization will file a public notice against the DOJ??
The NRA? NAGR? JPFO? The over 50 state “gun rights” groups???
Who will speak on TV or radio, about the importance of wide spread ownership of machine guns???
Any official spokesperson from these groups???
I remember when the Obama-Biden administration, gave away thousands of select fire weapons, to civilian police departments all across the united states years ago.
And the so-called “gun rights” groups said nothing.
The militia per Jefferson was to have weapons of military type and ammunition for the same. This is more about the government’s fear of the people, than it is about what type of firearm we own.
The tree of liberty must from time to time be watered with the blood of tyrants and patriots.
And yet, five articles newer, we hear that the Trump DoJ is taking the side of the second amendment.
Interesting.