Comm2A Files Amicus Brief in Chicago AWB Case

Makes sense. I was just curious about it in the context of the other lawsuit you guys have going. Just don't use militia - way too scary. [smile]

Keep up the good work.
 
Actually, I just figured out a good way of not using citizen. "Individual". So the phrase would be in "common use by law abiding individuals for lawful purposes". I have to consult with some actual attorneys, but I think this would work. I don't know of any use of the term individual that would be have secondary meaning contrary with our existing positions.
 
Thanks. I watched the video. I thought the Cook County counsel came across as rather lame. If you look over his shoulder at the older gentleman seated behind him you'll see him shaking his head.
 
I didn't watch it. I listened to it. It allows you to ignore those visual queues and focus on the content and meaning of the statements.
 
At this early stage of the litigation, in the procedural posture of this case, it cannot be said conclusively whether “assault weapons” as defined by the ordinance fall within or outside the scope of the rights protected by the second amendment. This question requires an empirical inquiry that goes beyond the scope of both the record in the current litigation and judicial notice.

It will be interesting to hear how Illinois argues that an "assault weapon" is more "killy" than any other semi-auto rifle and therefore falls outside the 2A. (If I'm reading the decision correctly)
 
It will be interesting to hear how Illinois argues that an "assault weapon" is more "killy" than any other semi-auto rifle and therefore falls outside the 2A. (If I'm reading the decision correctly)
If I am recalling the right judges, it will also be interesting to see how badly their "more killy" arguments fail when the judges take the stance that even if a balancing were done, they cannot show the so-called "assault weapons" are a significant factor in violent crime (0.25% typical rate per year according to the FBI).

As far I am concerned, 2A deserves strict scrutiny, but in the typical legal approach, even if you don't reach that conclusion and you want to balance, they still lose...
 
Last edited:
It will be interesting to hear how Illinois argues that an "assault weapon" is more "killy" than any other semi-auto rifle and therefore falls outside the 2A. (If I'm reading the decision correctly)

Yet Miller said in the '30's that guns needed to have a military use. Isn't this the opposite of that?
 
So then what?
The waiting for the court system begins. [sad2] Unfortunately, it took us 50 years to get here, it is going to take a few to dig out of this hole.

Though I think we should still pressure Bacon Hill, I honestly don't see any progress while Deval is still plugging the toilet there... Donate to Comm2A, get involved in local politics and fill the pipeline.
 
Back
Top Bottom