Like this article?


In the wake of the 2012 Newtown, Conn., elementary school shooting, a host of gun control laws were spawned as a result.  The left is never one to allow any good tragedy to go to waste in an effort to spread their agenda in their attempts to disarm Americans. As a result, an all out war was waged against firearms and gun ownership by states like Maryland and others.

In 2013 Maryland passed the Firearm Safety Act barring the sale of 45 kinds of firearms, dubbed “assault weapons” by the media, and limited gun magazines to 10-rounds. The decision was upheld by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia in a 10-4 ruling.

Image result for firearm safety act

Judge Robert King wrote of the decision, stating –

“Put simply, we have no power to extend Second Amendment protections to weapons of war. At the same time, according to the state’s evidence, the FSA-banned assault weapons have been used disproportionately to their ownership in mass shootings and the murders of law enforcement officers.”

He also cited the Supreme Court’s decision in District of Columbia v. Heller where the decision excludes the extension of such coverage.

Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh, who led the push for the law in 2013 as a state senator, said it’s “unthinkable that these weapons of war, weapons that caused the carnage in Newtown and in other communities across the country, would be protected by the Second Amendment.”

Now the Supreme Court may get involved.  If it takes up the case, this law could take center stage in the next big precedent setting case regarding the battle for our right to defend ourselves as Americans. The Plaintiffs in the case include disabled Naval veteran, Andrew Turner. Turner suffers from partial paralysis in his dominant hand due to an injury while still active duty.  As a result, the Maryland resident needs a semi automatic gun to defend himself as afforded to him in the Constitution.

Image result for firearm safety act
Attorney for the Plaintiffs, Jay Porter states the Supreme Court needs to clear up the morass of confusion left by lower courts in the patchwork of rulings that have occurred since the 2008 Heller decision.

Porter states  –

“We would like to see a reversal in the trend of the lower courts. At best, there is a lot of confusion in the lower courts about the Second Amendment. At worst, lower courts are ignoring and resisting the Heller decision because they didn’t like the outcome. That resistance needs to be mediated.”

In response to the tragedy at Newtown 21 states passed some form of new gun control measure in 2013, according to a joint report by the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence and the Brady Campaign. The majority of those laws dealt with background checks and record keeping ruled for gun dealers despite the fact that shooter Adam Lanza stole his mother’s firearms and they were not legally purchased. 4 states took this opportunity to pass or strengthen out and out bans on semiautomatic firearms in 2013 – California, Maryland, Connecticut, and New York. Those 4 states, as well as Colorado, also passed or strengthened bans on high capacity magazines as well.

Those stated were able to so IN SPITE of the Heller decision because some judges interpret that decision to deal with handguns only which in turn allows them to restrict what the media has dubbed the “assault rifles.”

The Plaintiffs in the case take objection to that interpretation and they are specifically disputing a lower court ruling that said the Second Amendment doesn’t apply to these guns noting a 1989 report by the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, or ATF, described semi automatic rifles as suitable for self-defense.

Plaintiffs’ petition to the Court reads –

“Heller struck down a prohibition on the firearms most commonly chosen for self-defense—handguns—even though handguns are arguably more ‘dangerous’ than other firearms, and even though firearms other than handguns remained available for use in self-defense. This court recognized and protected the principle at the heart of the interests enshrined by the Second Amendment: The individual – and not the government – retains the right to choose from among common arms those that they believe will best protect their person, family, and home.”

Image result for firearm safety act

These states say they are watching the case closely so as to respond accordingly.  All have filed amicus briefs on behalf of the Plaintiffs.

  • Alabama
  • Arizona
  • Alaska
  • Florida
  • Idaho
  • Kansas
  • Kentucky
  • Louisiana
  • Michigan
  • Missouri
  • Montana
  • Nebraska
  • New Mexico
  • North Dakota
  • Oklahoma
  • South Carolina
  • South Dakota
  • Texas
  • Utah
  • West Virginia
  • Wyoming

Meanwhile, the opposition does not rest and will not until all American citizens are disarmed.  These states have filed amicus briefs on behalf of the state of Maryland in support of the continued ban.

  • California
  • Connecticut
  • Hawaii
  • Illinois
  • Iowa
  • Massachusetts
  • Oregon
  • New York
  • District of Columbia

Now we wait to see if the Supreme Court will hear the case and pray that they do not continue to barter our liberties for the security of those that wish to rule over us. 

FOLLOW us on Facebook at Nation In Distress!

Here’s How To Be Sure To Continue Seeing Our Content On Facebook

Copyright 2017 Americas Freedom Fighters/ AFF Media. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without expressed permission.

Like this article?

Facebook Comments