9th Circuit Appeals Court blocks the assault weapon ruling..

Amazing how quickly Swiss Army knives can slaughter people.

Very happy to see this ruling. 

As a non-American I’m interested in hearing about weapon love. Can you tell me more about it? I

IMO - any gun can be an 'assault weapon" ... I wish there was a better way to stop people who shouldn't have any kind of weapon. The person I knew who took his life and the life of two innocent people used a 12 gauge shot gun. He should have never had that gun, but his family allowed him to have it. He was an adult (age 22) , who already had one 5150, and he might have had two. I believe the time period to own or posses a firearm after a 5150 is 5 years. His family was in major denial about his issues, and allowed him to have firearms, because he 'loved to hunt' and in their eyes, there was nothing wrong.

To this day, I do not understand why his family was not held accountable. This should be a part of what people want for gun control. One of the victims parents tried to sue them, but nothing came of it. I feel like the family that allowed him to have that gun (and I know for a fact he was allowed to have all his guns back from his family) should have been financially liable. They are devastated by the loss, but they were in no way held accountable. This still bothers me. They have the kind of money that allows them to hire the type of lawyer that will either string out the case forever or just not lose.

It doesn’t change the fact that the AR-15 is popular with mass shooters for the reasons already mentioned.

And “better way”? There are many “better ways” and Dem legislators have tried over and over and over again over many, many years to enact stricter gun policies to no avail. I don’t think I need to explain anymore who stands in the way, ensuring these policies never become laws.

That’s why states like CA have had to take the reins to at least minimize the likelihood of mass shootings and minimize the death toll. To go beyond the hypocrisy of “thoughts and prayers” and the chimera of “US superiority” every time a group of innocents is gunned down. To combat the counterfactual of unlimited gun ownership gun advocates had created out of the Heller decision when clearly, even Scalia had pointed out that there is another important limitation on the right to keep and carry arms —“prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons,” a fact conveniently ignored by gun lobbies. So manufacturing and selling enough of these dangerous and unusual weapons turn them into an exception for regulating because of “common use.”  

Setting aside the malarkey of equating an AR-15 with Swiss army knives in this specific case, “common use,” was the core of Judge Benitez’s ruling that was overturned by the 9th Circuit; his logic being that the AR-15’s “common use” imbues it with protection against legislative restraints. The tragedy of rulings like his is that they don’t take into account the number of lives lost. But I have no doubt that individuals like him would be conveying their “thoughts and prayers” each time there’s a mass shooting.

I can no longer muster the energy to argue why weapons like the AR-15 should be banned and why I agree with CA’s stance. As far as I’m concerned, the evidence backing up CA's decision is plentiful and compelling. My personal opinion is that as inviolable as gun advocates regard their 2A rights, I regard as even more inviolable the right of people to be free from the scourge of gun violence. And states that seriously undertake gun restrictions for the safety and preservation of lives are fulfilling their moral imperative to do so.