There is, according to the logic of all three major SCOTUS decisions on the subject. US v. Miller held that arms are protected insofar as they have a militia quality, and the AR-15 is the most suitable militia rifle due to its commonality in parts and ammunition with the military service rifle(s), as well as the ability of almost every Marine or Soldier to train citizens in its effective use. Heller holds that we have a right to common weapons used for legal purposes; the AR-15 is the most common of all rifles, and rifles account for only around 2% of gun crimes. Bruen holds that tradition matters, and the AR-15 has traditionally been lawful for citizens in most of the country.
It's high stakes, though. Thomas authored a concurring opinion holding that any ban of America's favorite rifle should draw Constitutional review; but he's the only one on the record.
1 comment:
Tom Grieve is an ex-prosecutor, now defense attorney with an interest in 2nd Amendment law. He has an interesting take on the constitutionality of the so-called ban on automatic weapons (so-called because there isn't a ban on them, just heavy government restrictions on their possession).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Had5nSicypw
Eric Hines
Post a Comment