'Assault Weapon' Bans Are a Step Closer to Supreme Court
New York's SAFE Act is upheld, ensuring a fiery debate before the justices.
On Monday the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued a ruling on gun restrictions in Connecticut and New York — including the latter’s SAFE Act — ultimately delivering a victory to the liberal leadership of both states. There were just a few exceptions. According to the Democrat & Chronicle, “The court … found New York’s requirement that only seven bullets can be loaded into a 10-round magazine is unconstitutional, upholding a previous court ruling.” Meanwhile, “In Connecticut, the court ruled against a provision that prohibits the ownership of a non-semiautomatic Remington 7615.” The measures otherwise remain intact. The leftist fanfare may be temporary, however. The constitutionality over so-called assault weapon bans, which the courts have interpreted in conflicting ways, will eventually have to be taken up by the Supreme Court. But the final arbiter should think carefully before undermining the Rule of Law.
To justify its ruling, the appeals court alarmingly determined, “When used, [‘assault’] weapons tend to result in more numerous wounds, more serious wounds, and more victims. These weapons are disproportionately used in crime, and particularly in criminal mass shootings. They are also disproportionately used to kill law enforcement officers.” The extent to which leftists are willing to distort the facts is breathtaking. As we recently documented, rifles of any type accounted for just 248 murders in 2014. You’re likelier to die from contact with a fist or foot. But even if rifles did account for most murders, this isn’t about “wounds, more serious wounds, and more victims.” It’s about enumerated rights. And magistrates are taking the nation on a dangerous path by making it up as they go along. The Supreme Court will soon face its most crucial decision yet. Buckle up.