SCOTUS: AWB NY and Conn STAND

[bignflnut]

In the aftermath of the Orlando mass shooting, weapon rights activists on both side of the divide were closely looking at the Supreme Court today, and specifically whether the top legal institution would accept a challenge to assault weapon bans in two key states as part of Shew v. Malloy, 15-1030, and Kampfer v. Cuomo, 15-8704. However moments ago we learned that in an attempt to steer clear of an intensifying national debate after the Florida shooting, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to question assault-rifle bans in New York and Connecticut.

As Bloomberg reports, turning away two separate appeals, the justices left intact federal appeals court rulings that said the bans comply with the constitutional right to bear arms. New York and Connecticut are among seven states that outlaw weapons similar to one used by Omar Mateen in the June 12 massacre.

Of course...Omar didn't use an AR15

[JustaShooter]

Not sure I understand what your comment has to do with the decision and the article you quoted...

[bignflnut]

Just to say that they reference the Orlando shooting, while nobody in NY or Connecticut legislated against Omar's weapon of choice, it was all aimed at the AR platform...they even mention later in the article that Omar didn't use an AR15

The bulk of the push today is against the modular, interchangeable, modern rifle, the AR platform, not Omar's weapon of choice.

Just pointing out how Bloomberg is being less than honest in its reporting, in pushing its agenda.

How can a ban comply with a right?

[JustaShooter]

But, that's a distinction without a difference. The NY and Conn. bans apply to non-AR rifles, as did the 1984 AWB since they are focused on (mostly) cosmetic features that apply to many models of rifle. They were not crafted to be manufacturer or model-specific. Drawing a distinction between the AR15 and the rifle used by the Orlando shooter is immaterial to those laws, as well as the proposed legislation, hence my inquiry.

[bignflnut]

I understand the viewpoint that it's "a distinction without a difference" in that they're all semi-auto rifles with certain cosmetic / ergonomic features.

However, it also demonstrates the ignorance of those people who call for a ban because they can't distinguish anything except to say that it's an AR15. The brainwashed masses have been so stupefied that all they can utter is A-R.

I know the small difference, and so do you...but we're not pushing to outlaw an ergonomic and appealing inanimate object.
The people that say these things, should, at a minimum, know what they're discussing, shouldn't they?

[M-Quigley]

Most anti gunners I've met think anything that is fed from a detachable magazine and is semi auto is an assault weapon, and the latest federal AW ban proposed pretty much defines it that way.