The SCOTUS Needs to Take an AR Ban Case
BY Herschel Smith
6 days, 3 hours ago
Because of the cowardly actions of the supreme court, this sort of stuff keeps happening. And it will get worse and worse with time. They’ll turn your bolt action hunting rifle into a super accurate and incredibly dangerous sniper rifle.
The SCOTUS has run from this issue for years. It’s time to turn and face the music.
In oral arguments today at the First Circuit, a judge asked Massachusetts if the state's argument that AR-15s are unprotected by the Second Amendment because they're neither used in nor suitable for self-defense means that hunting guns also aren't protected (@ 14:30)
The state…
— Firearms Policy Coalition (@gunpolicy) March 2, 2026
On March 3, 2026 at 6:12 pm, X said:
The entire “suitable for self-defense” nonsense is dicta. The Second Amendment does not mention self-defense, it simply says that the “right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
The argument is absolutely right, though. If the criteria for Second Amendment protection is “self-defense,” then most common hunting rifles, 14 pound benchrest target rifles, Palma rifles, 30″ goose guns, trap guns, over and unders, etc. are not protected.
Same thing goes for the “common use” nonsense. The .22 LR was not in common use in 1791, is it therefore not protected?
None of this is even a consideration of the courts stick to the simple and plain language of the Constitution.
On March 4, 2026 at 9:44 pm, Paul B said:
And so it starts. In 1776 you could have cannons. Use one of those for self defense. 2a is not about self defense in the small sense.