by The comment of the day comes from Jim Shepherd of the Outdoor Wires. He concludes his discussion of the 4th Circuit’s majority opinion in Kolbe v. Hogan with this:
But don’t forget, that if this silly ruling were to survive, it wouldn’t be much of a reach- at least for lawyers and legislators- to extend the withdrawal of protections to everything from bolt action rifles and pump shotguns (trench guns in World Wars I & II and Vietnam) to the venerable cowboy action lever guns carried by the U.S. Army in the 1800s.
Will this one head to the Supreme Court?
Probably.But with the District of Columbia and Chicago still thumbing their noses at the high court after rulings that should have repealed their oppressive anti-gun regulations, what real difference would it make?
When it comes to protecting the enumerated right defined in the Second Amendment, the United States Supreme Court isn’t just divided.
It’s toothless.
Why should any state or local official be concerned with the “supreme court” and its rulings if the court itself lacks the conviction to compel compliance?
Unenforced rules aren’t rules, they’re suggestions.
Jim is absolutely correct. The Supreme Court has had multiple opportunities to reinforce and correct misinterpretations of their rulings in Heller and McDonald. Every time they have blinked and let them go unchallenged.
Erin Palette was correct to call Supreme Court nominations “the Kardashians of politics”. By extension and given their reluctance to take another Second Amendment case, I’d call the justices themselves “the Kardashians of politics”.
The Army never carried lever-action rifles, except in the movies. They carried single-shot trapdoor Springfields. So your levers are safe, unless the court took the same history classes Mr. Shepherd apparently did.
https://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2015/6/11/winchester-lever-actions-go-to-war/
The War Dept purchased 1895 Winchesters for use in the Spanish American War and the Russians bought a bunch of the same for fighting. Therefore by the convoluted 'logic' of the 4th Circuit lever-actions are weapons of war. As are muskets. As is everything. Nothing is safe – look at Britain. You can't even buy silverware there unless you're 18 yrs old. The Left hates us. They hate freedom. We cannot rest or be complacent.
That's the truth, in just a few words… Dammit…
What about the Henrys issued during the War for Southern Independence?
Henrys were never issued; they were purchased by individuals and individual regiments. The Army did issue Spencer lever-actions, both rifles and carbines, from about 1863; they were replaced by single-shot Springfields as they became available (some were replaced by Allin conversions before 1873). But we all know the writer was referring to the Winchesters that were the standard issue of the 1st Hollywood Cavalry.
Where does the "sporting use" concept come from? There's nothing in the 2A that even remotely resembles that, and yet this ruling seems to say only guns with a sporting use are allowable. Nothing ever used militarily is allowable.
That has to go down.
I could be a little off on my history but I think the sporting use concept or test first came into being with the Gun Control Act of 1968. If anyone knows of an earlier usage, please comment.