Amicus Brief In Mass. Gun Ban Case

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

BELLEVUE, Wash., Aug. 29, 2018 /PRNewswire/ -- The Second Amendment Foundation has been joined by several other groups and Second Amendment scholars in filing an amicus brief with the First U.S. Court of Appeals supporting a challenge of the Massachusetts semi-auto rifle ban.

Joining SAF are the Cato Institute, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, Millennial Policy Center and the Independence Institute. The case is known as Worman v. Healey.

The case centers on a simple question: Can a state ban arms that are in common use by law-abiding citizens?

"We could hardly ignore a case of such importance," said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. "The ban on so-called 'assault weapons' now being enforced in Massachusetts under Attorney General Maura Healey's expanded definition is both arbitrary and unconstitutional. It cannot be allowed to stand, based on common sense and principles set down by the U.S. Supreme Court in the 2008 Heller ruling.
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/saf-joined-by-other-groups-in-filing-amicus-brief-in-mass-gun-ban-case-300704503.html

[Alea]

1. I hope this goes to scotus

If for no other reason, the Mass AG shouldn't be able to ban anything. It should have at least went through the States Legislative process. Get thee to scotus asap, along with NY, CT, CA, HI, IL, WA activist decisions.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

2. Like so many other issues today...

...a properly motivating conflict with a probable disregard for the personal RKBA must be brought to court by a person with the ability, interest and determination to pursue the case. I'm certain, as with Heller... there will be supportive organizations but the focus begins with a single person denied rights and probably charged with a crime.

IMHO, the Second Amendment (which many regard in principle as the first) echoes the wisdom of an admired and disparaged writer and political figure:

"When you disarm the people, you commence to offend them and show that you distrust them either through cowardice or lack of confidence, and both of these opinions generate hatred." - Niccolo Machiavelli
Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/niccolo_machiavelli_125080

In my mind, one of the guiding canons of government must be respect and tolerance in the development and execution of the law. Respect for the people and tolerance of those with convictions that may lead to civil disobedience.

One other quote:

Jefferson's comment in an 1825 letter to William Short: "Some are whigs, liberals, democrats, call them what you please. Others are tories, serviles, aristocrats, &c. The latter fear the people, and wish to transfer all power to the higher classes of society; the former consider the people as the safest depository of power in the last resort; they cherish them therefore, and wish to leave in them all the powers to the exercise of which they are competent."

This was rephrased a century later by a someone unknown to me as: "When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny." The Declaration, Constitution and Bill of Rights are intended to guard the people from the will of the party in the majority.