• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Biden pick says AR-15 rifles not commonly used for 'lawful purposes'

Reptile

NES Member
Rating - 100%
109   0   0
Joined
Dec 13, 2006
Messages
19,391
Likes
9,114
Xavier Becerra in line for Health and Human Services job
California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, President-elect Joe Biden’s pick to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, said AR-15s are akin to military-grade weapons and not useful for self defense in a 2019 court filing.

The AG’s statements were included in a court case that challenged California’s gun ban titled Rupp v. Becerra, in which multiple state residents sued government officials to overturn the prohibition of certain semi-automatic firearms. Becerra, an advocate for the Affordable Care Act, was announced as Biden’s pick to lead HHS Sunday, according to the New York Times.

“Assault rifles may be banned because they are, like the M-16, ‘weapons that are most useful in military service’’; and ‘they are also not ‘in common use’ for lawful purposes like self-defense,'” Becerra wrote in defense of California’s weapon ban.

The AG also argued, citing Kolbe v. Hogan, a prominent gun case, that an M-16, a military rifle capable of firing fully automatic, is less lethal than an AR-15, which is incapable of transitioning to fully automatic fire, the court document read. Becerra also presented an argument from the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence which alleged that “assault weapons” possess “no legitimate civilian purpose.”


In before ban!
 

MaverickNH

NES Member
Rating - 100%
7   0   0
Joined
Nov 24, 2005
Messages
4,276
Likes
2,308
Location
SoNH
The more bureaucratic policies and executive orders Biden’s administration enacts the more court battles will ensue. And the more conflicts between federal circuit courts the more cases go to SCOTUS.

Sure, we fight every law, every rule, every executive order. But it’s the big wins that stop the death of 1000 cuts.
 

Admin

Staff member
Administrator
Moderator
NES Member
Rating - 100%
18   0   0
Joined
Feb 25, 2005
Messages
40,129
Likes
20,217
Location
Monadnock area, NH
The more bureaucratic policies and executive orders Biden’s administration enacts the more court battles will ensue. And the more conflicts between federal circuit courts the more cases go to SCOTUS.

Sure, we fight every law, every rule, every executive order. But it’s the big wins that stop the death of 1000 cuts.
Just wait until he adds 5 commie judges to the SCOTUS
 

gene

NES Member
Rating - 100%
32   0   0
Joined
Oct 22, 2007
Messages
5,231
Likes
645
By that logic millions of AR's sold and owned to validated & pre screened law abiding persons were actually sold to criminals with criminal intent.
That's just pretty darn stupid no matter how you argue it!
 

bauer

NES Member
Rating - 100%
14   0   0
Joined
Sep 1, 2015
Messages
740
Likes
1,816
Location
The Land of Rocks & Holly
How many ARs need to be sold before they are considered "common"
This guy is an idiot.
This.

As an analogy (my imaginary court room retort to this stupidity):

How many trucks has GM sold since 2004? (end of AWB)

How many of those trucks have been involved in an accident of any kind? (I bet a substantially higher percentage than for Ar’s)

How many have been involved in an incident causing bodily harm? (Higher than AR’s)

How many have been used in the commission of a crime? (Higher than Ar’s)

Would you consider a GM truck to not be in common use for lawful purposes?
 

GM-GUY

NES Member
Rating - 100%
5   0   0
Joined
May 27, 2008
Messages
10,946
Likes
8,362
Location
North Central Mass
Just wait until he adds 5 commie judges to the SCOTUS

or pull the NSA files and flight logs on the Lolita Express as well as video from pedophile island and have a nice sit down with some of the justices. Lets say Kavanaugh, Gorsuch & Alito are clean / what if their brother, relative or close friend is on the block? Just saying adding justices may not be needed.
 

snax

NES Member
Rating - 100%
26   0   0
Joined
Dec 1, 2009
Messages
6,069
Likes
6,393
Location
LA - lowell area
This.

As an analogy (my imaginary court room retort to this stupidity):

How many trucks has GM sold since 2004? (end of AWB)

How many of those trucks have been involved in an accident of any kind? (I bet a substantially higher percentage than for Ar’s)

How many have been involved in an incident causing bodily harm? (Higher than AR’s)

How many have been used in the commission of a crime? (Higher than Ar’s)

Would you consider a GM truck to not be in common use for lawful purposes?
Now, a Flobert parlor rifle. Those ain't common. Ban them.
 

jkelly1229

NES Member
Rating - 100%
9   0   0
Joined
Nov 16, 2014
Messages
8,110
Likes
5,709
Cool... so instead of focusing on a made up pandemic or all the people hospitals misdiagnose and kill... he's going to worry about something he has no qualifications talking about... well I guess at least Harris knows a commie hack when she appoints one
 

Parker Schreiber

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Sep 29, 2020
Messages
268
Likes
360
You can review the filing here:

While I disagree with the filing factually, Becerra had little choice. Newsom wanted to defend the law, and whoever represented California in the lawsuit had a duty to do so zealously. Had he not challenged the plaintiff's offerings of proof nor cited the ruling in Kolbe v. Hogan, he would not have fulfilled that duty. It doesn't matter that you, or I reject the Kolbe "most useful in military service” test, nor that the "“most useful in military service" claim is provably false for semi-automatic rifles. What matters is that the court did.

So this is a non-story. While my "read" of Becerra is that he'll test the limits of Heller and McDonald, the filing was just one sequence in a typical legal dance.
 

silversquirrel

NES Member
Rating - 100%
5   0   0
Joined
Jan 6, 2013
Messages
2,513
Likes
2,344
Location
Gloucester
In the 90s, I was snowed in a few times, one winter, between jobs, and started watching cspan now and then. The senate was debating assault rifles. I was not very political, but came to quickly realize democrats were emotional, illogical, and dishonest regarding the issue. One idiot in particular. Are they like that with every issue? I knew nothing about these rifles, but soon educated myself, and decided I might like to own one of these soon to be extinct semi autos. Before the the bill passed, I picked up a very nice used colt, with a terrifying bayonet lug and adjustable stock, etc. It even came with an original colt .22 conversion kit. I got a lot of fun use from that gun, at the range over the years. A few year ago, I had some bills to pay, and reluctantly sold it for a very nice profit.

That babbling idiot on CSPAN 26 years ago is moving in to the white house next month.
Back then, few people knew what an AR 15 was. Now, everyone does, and millions of Americans own at least one. Thanks Joe.
Have fun with that.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jan 27, 2015
Messages
4,338
Likes
3,696
Location
Merrimack Valley
Most popular gun in the US not in use for lawful purposes like "self defense"...

Uh ok, even if I let you have that line of bulkshi the most popular gun in the US is certainly in use for lawful purposes like sporting and target shooting.
 

wahsben

NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 100%
35   0   0
Joined
May 20, 2005
Messages
12,097
Likes
5,664
Location
Ma.
The BOR of which the 2A is a part of is a restriction on government. It bars government from infringing on the peoples right to keep and bear arms. So they can take their common usage and stuff it where the sun don't shine.
 

Amd813

NES Member
Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Joined
May 9, 2013
Messages
596
Likes
350
Thats a pretty stupid statement considering that gun stats prove the exact opposite.
 
Last edited:

cams

NES Member
Rating - 100%
27   0   0
Joined
Sep 7, 2013
Messages
5,868
Likes
19,525
Location
Boston
Any firearm is a viable option for self defense. Plain and simple. This guy is nobody among nobodies.
 

snax

NES Member
Rating - 100%
26   0   0
Joined
Dec 1, 2009
Messages
6,069
Likes
6,393
Location
LA - lowell area
The BOR of which the 2A is a part of is a restriction on government. It bars government from infringing on the peoples right to keep and bear arms. So they can take their common usage and stuff it where the sun don't shine.
Somebody, somewhere, invented that common use BS in order to come up with a way to infringe. Once that is dismissed, they'll invent some other BS term and hammer the issue that way.

I never wanted an AR until I was told I couldn't have one. Now I do. I never wanted a Glock until I was told I couldn't have one of those either. Now I do. Its funny how human nature is such that what you are told you cannot have, you now want even more.
I was told I couldn't have a pony.
Didn't want one after that. Still don't. WTF is a pony good for anyway?

AR-15 is more lethal than an M16? Good give me my bump stock back and let's all get full autos
We should get a gun friendly congressman to introduce a bill abolishing the NFA based of that argument alone. If they are less deadly, what is the need for a restriction?
 

wahsben

NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 100%
35   0   0
Joined
May 20, 2005
Messages
12,097
Likes
5,664
Location
Ma.
Somebody, somewhere, invented that common use BS in order to come up with a way to infringe. Once that is dismissed, they'll invent some other BS term and hammer the issue that way.
Just like sporting purposes etc. They don't have the constitutional authority to come up with anything but that's never stopped them because they have continued to get away with infringing upon our rights.
 

Amd813

NES Member
Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Joined
May 9, 2013
Messages
596
Likes
350
well, he's a democrat, so...
Yeah I know, it just pisses me off when there are people who would believe such a statement wholesale when it can be disproven in 5 seconds with a few movements of ones thumbs and an iPhone search bar.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom