Miller v. Bonta – US District Court Judge, Roger Benitez, ousted the 30yr old ban on the AR15 recently. Modern Sporting Rifles (MSRs) are unconstitutional to ban. You can enjoy excerpts like, “The Second Amendment protects modern weapons… They are principally AR-15 type rifles, pistols, and shotguns. Plaintiffs and others refer to them as “modern sporting rifles” although they are clearly useful for more than just sport.” and more.
Once you begin to grasp just how important “judicial review” actually is, you’ll understand why we need strict scrutiny in Iowa’s Right to Keep and Bear Arms Amendment, otherwise known as the “Freedom Amendment” that will be placed on the 2022 ballot. Here is our language:
“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. The sovereign state of Iowa affirms and recognizes this right to be a fundamental individual right. Any and all restrictions of this right shall be subject to strict scrutiny.”
Enjoy the release and story from NSSF for more on this developing situation HERE.
I agree to the above post about “Enumerated Right up to the interpretation of a Court of Political Majority.”, but I’m also wondering about Iowa’s long ban on Offensive weapons also?!?
At the begining of the civil war, I read, obviously quite some time ago (since REAL history books are no longer printed!!), that Gen. Washington and his army actually had to ask CIVILIANS if they could borrow or buy their CANNONS to use in the war. Which brings up the funny “bazooka” name in the video on this web site, but still, a cannon is an “arm” in every sense of the word. Along with the M-134 minigun, and others that spit out multiple bullets with a single pull of the trigger. And back in the late 60’s when Iowa banned “machine guns”, they did offer to grandfather in those that had working machine guns (as the Polk Co Jail housed at one time, a German WWll 9mm sub machine gun that belonged to Terry Hobt, though the outcome of the “ARM” was not made known when Hobt left employment), yet Iowa law doesn’t say anthing about this now.
So I wonder how the actual “wording” will play out and whether the Freedom Amendment is just another platitude for gun ownders, or if it will actually have some “bite” to it once enacted….
IFC, Please comment if you would…..
Finally, justice!
“Subject to Strict Scrutiny” Once again leaves an Enumerated Right up to the interpretation of a Court of Political Majority. I see little victory in such language.