Gun-control group happy with court’s assault-ban decision

Conservative justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia, writing for the dissent, said they would have taken up the challenge.

For context, the second amendment of the Constitution guarantees all citizens the right to bear arms, but there is a longstanding legal debate over the scope of the second amendment and reasonable limits to gun ownership (such as over age of 18, barring felons from gun ownership, etc).

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to take up a controversial case out of IL that effectively upheld a ban on assault weapons as consistent with the Second Amendment.

“The justices appear anything but eager to enter into the Second Amendment fray again”, he added.

Monday’s decision not to hear an appeal in the IL case is being described as a victory for gun control in some national media and “people will probably over-react” to the decision on both sides of the gun issue.

Lower federal Courts ruled that statutes such as Highland Park’s were not at odds with the Supreme Court’s rulings in 2008 and 2010, which permitted handguns to be kept at home for self-defense. Lower courts have dismissed similar Second Amendment challenges to such laws in other parts of America, saying assault weapons are disproportionately used to commit crimes and “criminal mass shootings”. Bullet magazines that hold more than ten rounds are even more common than assault rifles: they are said to make up nearly half of all the handgun and rifle magazines owned by Americans.

He said a ban may not prevent mass shootings “but it may reduce the carnage if a mass shooting occurs”. A federal appeals court in October upheld the core prohibition on assault weapons in the CT and NY laws.

“Why else are they the weapon of choice in mass shootings?” he asked. They insisted that the appeals court had gutted their rulings on the right to keep and bear arms.

Gun-control supporters argue that the recent shootings demonstrate the need for tighter controls.

“We wanted to give the message that our community was going to reflect the values we support”, Rotering said.

In addition, the Legislature has expressly prohibited cities from enacting local regulations of guns that are stricter than state firearms law.

The case came from a Highland Park pediatrician who objected to the city’s 2013 ban on semi-automatic weapons and large-capacity magazines.

Richard Pearson, the director of the Illinois State Rifle Association, was disappointed the Supreme Court did not hear the case but said his organization is still waiting for the conclusion of a state-court case challenging a similar ban in Illinois’ largest county, Cook County. In 2015, he said more than 300 of them were purchased.

Appeals court Judge Frank Easterbrook said judges should defer to city and state officials who seek to protect the public’s safety.

Semi-automatic weapons are capable of shooting a single round with each pull of the trigger and, consequently, can fire rapidly.

Though Friedman did not return numerous calls from the Daily North Shore nor respond to any of its emails to comment on the case, Richard Pearson, the executive director of the rifle association, said the Supreme Court action was a blip in the road.