Last month, Virginia became the 12th state to enact an “assault weapons” ban, which was signed into law by Governor Abigail Spanberger on April 13. The Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) and two other Second Amendment groups in macdonald v. katzthey filed a lawsuit Thursday in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia.
“Spanberger’s insane law criminalizes constitutionally protected conduct and prohibits the use of Second Amendment-protected weapons,” said FPC Chairman Brandon Combs. “We will force Governor Spanberger and other government thugs to abide by the Constitution and respect the Second Amendment, completely stop.”
Virginia’s law is similar to other “assault weapons” bans that often define the category based on arbitrary undesirable gun characteristics. The law criminalizes the manufacture, import, sale, purchase or transfer of “assault firearms,” which is defined to include a semi-automatic center-fire rifle that accepts a detachable magazine and has any of the five listed characteristics: 1) Folding or adjustable A stock, 2) a thumbhole stock or pistol grip, 3) a second grip or a protruding grip that can be held by a non-trigger hand, 4) a grenade launcher, or 5) a threaded barrel that can be used to attach a muzzle breaker, muzzle compensator, silencer, or flash hider.
The definition covers some of the most popular firearms sold in the United States, including AR-15-style rifles. In January, the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the gun industry trade association, reported that Americans owned more than 32 million “modern sporting rifles,” the preferred term for models covered by bans like the Virginia’s.
Survey data shows that approximately 16 million to 25 million Americans own AR-15-style rifles. They often report using it for legitimate purposes such as self-defense, hunting, and target shooting.
This rifle is rarely used by criminals. “According to FBI statistics covering the ten-year period from 2014 to 2023, an average of 380 homicides per year involved a rifle of any type,” the FPC, NRA and Second Amendment Foundation said in the lawsuit. “Even if each of these homicides was committed with an AR-15-style or other semi-automatic rifle, that would mean that more than 99.99 percent of them were committed with an AR-15-style or other semi-automatic rifle.” no Used to kill people in a certain year. Other items more frequently used in homicides include handguns (7,044 per year on average), knives (1,593) and personal weapons such as hands and feet (692). “
Although Virginia considers prohibited rifle features to be particularly suitable for committing crimes, they have legal functions. For example, the folding and telescoping stock “makes it easy to carry over long distances while hunting” and “can be safely transported, including in a hiking bag, ATV or boat,” FPC et al. notes. They also “increase the likelihood of successful home defense by allowing for safe storage of defensive instruments in accessible spaces and making the rifle maneuverable in confined spaces.” Adjustable stocks “enable the firearm to better fit the individual shooter, thereby enhancing the individual’s ability to use the firearm safely and effectively.”
Pistol grip “increases accuracy and reduces the risk of misfires by stabilizing the grip
“They are actually required by the rectilinear design of the AR-15 rifle, where the centerline of the barrel is continuous with the buttstock, a design feature that reduces muzzle rise caused when the firearm is fired,” the complaint states. The protruding grip “opens up hunting and sport shooting to those where recoil poses a challenge.”
The lawsuit states that flash suppressors “not only reduce the chance that a burglar will identify a victim’s location, but also protect homeowners from being temporarily blinded when firing a weapon in self-defense.” Flash suppressors also “increase the accuracy of target shooting and hunting (especially at dawn).”
The complaint does not delve into grenade launchers, possibly because including them in Virginia’s ban would have little practical significance. Grenade launchers are strictly regulated as “destructive devices” under the National Firearms Act, as are hand grenades.
Virginia law also prohibits the use of “high-capacity” magazines, capping ammunition capacity at 15 rounds. Like the “assault firearms” ban, this provision prohibits the joint use of weapons for lawful purposes. AR-15s are often sold with magazines that can hold up to 30 rounds. According to the 2024 NSSF report, between 1990 and 2021, Americans purchased more than 400 million rifle magazines with a capacity of 30 rounds or more.
“According to the 2021 National Firearms Survey, 21.6% of gun owners,
The lawsuit states that approximately 18 million Americans own handgun magazines that hold more than 15 rounds. “The popularity of these magazines is not surprising. Many popular handguns often come with magazines that hold more than 15 rounds, and many popular rifles, including the country’s most popular semi-automatic rifles, have standard magazines that hold more than 15 rounds.”
The Virginia law’s broad application is constitutionally relevant because the Supreme Court said the Second Amendment applies to weapons “commonly used” for “lawful purposes such as self-defense.” The lawsuit states that “millions of peaceful people have determined that AR-15-style rifles” and other semi-automatic rifles covered by Virginia’s ban “are the best options for self-defense.”
The complaint raises a possible reason for this choice: “Many AR-style firearms are chambered for 5.56x45mm NATO ammunition, which also accepts .223 Remington ammunition. These ammunition are relatively cheap and common, and are particularly suitable for home defense purposes because they have sufficient stopping power in the event of a home invasion, but quickly lose velocity after passing through targets and other objects, thereby reducing the chance of hitting the target with an errant shot. Just as importantly, the AR-15 The platform and others are modular, allowing individual users and owners to modify the firearm to the safest and easiest-to-use specifications based on their specific physical and environmental self-defense needs.”
in spite of Why People may like that guns are banned in Virginia, but the fact is that millions of Americans use them for lawful purposes. Likewise, it’s worth noting that banned rifles are not the weapons of choice for criminals (or even mass shooters), but that fact is obviously not constitutionally decisive. Landmark Cases of 2008 District of Columbia v. HellerAfter all, the Supreme Court has held that Americans have a right to own handguns, describing them as “the quintessential self-defense weapon,” despite their prominence in homicide statistics.
Heller Contrasting weapons commonly used for lawful purposes with “dangerous and unusual weapons,” the court said those weapons could be banned without violating the Second Amendment. But the firearms banned in Virginia are “in all respects ordinary semi-automatic firearms,” the lawsuit says. “To the extent that they differ from other semi-automatic firearms, their distinguishing features make them safer and easier to use. Whatever new categories of weapons state legislators create, they cannot be banned because they are not dangerous and unusual.”
Those guns, FPCs, etc. Says, “Common in all respects: (1) They are common in an absolute sense, since both function and operate as semi-automatic; (2) They are common in character, since they are both popular weapon configurations (e.g., rifles) with different barrels common characteristics such as length and pistol grip; and (3) they are common in jurisdiction and can be legally owned and used by most countries now and throughout relevant history for a variety of legitimate purposes, such as self-defense, skill training, competition, recreation, hunting and gathering.”
Under the constitutional test laid down by the Supreme Court in 2022 case New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. BrunnVirginia has the burden of proving that its ban is “consistent with this country’s historic tradition of gun control.” The state “will be unable to prove anything of the sort,” the suit says. “Heller and Brun Already established only Historical practices that allow for the prohibition of certain types of weapons—historical restrictions on dangerous and unusual weapons. But to be banned under this historical convention, the arm must be both dangerous and dangerous. and abnormal. Commonly used weapons—like guns and magazines, which are undoubtedly prohibited in Virginia—cannot Unusual. “
argument in macdonald v. katz It mirrors the logic of other lawsuits challenging “assault weapons” bans, including two recently filed by the Justice Department’s civil rights division in the District of Columbia and Colorado. While federal appeals courts have so far not accepted such claims, there are signs the Supreme Court may.
Judge Brett Kavanaugh of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit dissented from a 2011 ruling upholding the District of Columbia’s “assault weapons” ban, and Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch have all said they are interested in weighing in on the constitutionality of such laws. Since approval of the petition requires the concurrence of four justices, it suggests the Supreme Court may soon address the issue.
The post Federal lawsuit says Virginia’s new ‘assault gun’ ban is patently unconstitutional appeared first on Reason.com.
