Hunters take note: State attorneys are arguing your rifles are not “constitutionally” protected in Connecticut.
What does that mean? According to attorney Joshua Perry, who works for the Connecticut Attorney General’s office, this means hunting rifles are legal but not protected by the Constitution. He argues that the Constitution only guarantees citizens the right to guns commonly used in self-defense and that semi-automatic rifles used in hunting do not fall into that category.
This discussion came up on Wednesday in the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Attorneys representing Gov. Ned Lamont and the National Association for Gun Rights (NAGR) made oral arguments in front of Judge Alison Nathan. This was a part of a lawsuit the NAGR filed against the state last year.
NAGR, and a co-plaintiff Toni Theresa Spera, are challenging “An Act Concerning Gun Violence Prevention and Children’s Safety.” The act, which was passed after the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, bans the sale of firearms and accessories classified as “assault weapons.” NAGR and Spera believe this violates their Second Amendment rights.
Perry argued the state could restrict guns not commonly used for self-defense. Nathan asked if, by this logic, semi-automatic hunting rifles were protected. Perry said they are not.
“Connecticut restricts instrumentalities that are unusually dangerous, that are like M16 rifles, that have combat functional features, that allow users to hose down… a battlefield or tragically a school and cause a disproportionate number of casualties,” Perry said.
He referenced the bans of the M16. In 2008, the Supreme Court upheld a ban on the weapon in Columbia v. Heller.
Perry argues that the “plain text as historically understood” of the U.S. Constitution protects the right to self-defense, “not a right to possess any type of weapon for any sort of confrontation.”
Immediately after these arguments, another gun case was argued: Eddie Grant, Jr., v. James Rovella. Perry presented during these arguments as well.
“Connecticut has not banned hunting rifles. Whether or not they are constitutionally protected, they are certainly democratically protected,” Perry said. “As a rule, something that is popular doesn’t need constitutional protection, because it’s popular. Hunting rifles would certainly fall into that category.”
He went on to say, “As to whether Connecticut could restrict hunting rifles, I think we probably could not, because I think it could be shown that they are not unusually dangerous. They are not ill disproportionately suited in the way that… AR-15s are, and the record might well show that they were used and useful for self-defense. I’ll be honest, we have not done that analysis, but I have no reason to think that wouldn’t be true.”
The core of the matter, according to Attorney Cameron Atkinson, who is representing who argued in Grant v. Rovella, is interpreting the Supreme Court’s ruling in Columbia v. Heller, which said that a weapon can be banned if it is a “dangerous and unusual weapon.” The trial court in this matter also accepted “unusually dangerous” or “dangerous or unusual” on review, which has set up a debate over whether a gun can be banned without meeting both elements. In legal terms, it’s a “conjunctive test” vs a “disjunctive test.”
Atkinson says this conjunctive is the proper view, saying: “The Supreme Court has clearly required Connecticut to show that AR-15s are dangerous and unusual weapons. Connecticut cannot satisfy that requirement because the AR-15 is more popular than the Ford F-150 pickup truck. Instead of acknowledging that their law is unconstitutional, Connecticut is asking the Second Circuit to adopt a vague test that defies the Supreme Court and will allow them to ban all guns based on hysteria about how dangerous they are.”
Semi-automatic shotguns are used for hunting pheasants, waterfowl and partridge, according to Eugene Kisielewski, the treasurer of the Northwest Connecticut Rod and Gun Club, who spoke with Inside Investigator about hunting and gun ownership in Connecticut.
Kisielewski, who owns a semi-automatic shotgun to hunt pheasants, believes gun regulations in Connecticut are too strict, and expects them to get stricter in the immediate future.
“We do have a constitutional right to own and use firearms. When you’re talking [banning] about a particular type of firearm, then I think you’re really discriminating overall,” he said. “Unfortunately, I don’t see the difference in hunting with a semi-auto versus a bolt action or a pump action or a single shot. The projectile still comes out at the end of the barrel at a high rate of speed.”
Attorney Barry Arrington, who represented NAGR, says the AR-15 is not dangerous or unusual in the United States.
“The fact of the matter is that this is political grandstanding by the Connecticut legislature, it has no effect on crime,” Arrington told Inside Investigator in an interview. “For obvious reasons, a criminal is not going to walk down the street with the AR-15. All the cases say that handguns are preferred by shooters, even in mass shootings.”
The AR-15 is the most common rifle in the United States.
According to a report from the National Institute of Justice, over 75% of mass shootings involved handguns, and 25% involved assault rifles.
However, only 3% of gun deaths involved rifles of any kinds, according to Pew Research Center.
“If the most popular rifle in America is not protected by the constitution, then [no rifle] is,” Arrington said in court.
Was this article helpful?
Topics on this page
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
The Supreme Court has already decided this subject. The state attorney is grandstanding,
showboating for his fans. Makes voters wonder, where did he earn his law degree. Obviously wasted his money.
.. Shall not be infringed…
Communists are everywhere! Their grandparents would be ashamed of them!
The constitution is black and white and they just want to make it go away, traitors to our country!
Very well said…2nd amendment is for citizens to have a well armed militia just in case we run across too many uneducated idiots trying to take our constitutional rights away…not for self defense…know your rights, and get some guns!
Connecticut Constitution Art. 1, § 15. Right to bear arms “Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state.“
All the mass shooting in school are Son of rich people they let kids do everything and not educate them how dangerous is any gun I have hunting rifle so I no like any ban
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
To some degree, CT AG is correct. Nowhere does it state that hunting weapons are protected, but last time I checked, a Remington 700 makes a damn fine sniper rifle and THAT shall not be infringed, nor my ownership of an AR platform rifle.
Arms
They also tend to forget the common usage of Regulated has changed between 1789 and now. Back when it was written regulated in common parlance was `to make something regular’, as in relation to the 2nd amendment, everyone should have ready a certain amount of supplies with their firearms, basically a Go Bag. Washington actually wrote a list that was published for those who planned to be ready on a moments notice. X lbs of Gun powder, X lbs flash powder, X amount of wadding, X rounds of ball, X pieces of flint, X lbs of lead, Molds to cast balls, X days worth of dried food, X amount of water, Fowl weather gear, X days of clothing, etc… That was regulated, not a list of inane rules that are designed to limit your abilities and rights.
Stop ignorant Supreme Court precedent. All bearable arms are Constitutionally protected.
The supremacy clause of the USA constitution thwarts any states authority over the original United States constitution. Guns are not violent, people are. Take the guns and other stories of violence, out what is deemed entertainment. You never see politicians address this, which is odd, because the cry about gun violence all the time. Glad I’m pure Irish and comprehend reality.
Out of the 10,000 or so murders in the United States each year, less than 400 are committed with a rifle of any kind including the evil black rifle. And they are US Constitution has nothing to do with hunting. It’s about civilians who make up the militia being able to defend themselves against tyrants, foreign and domestic. The founding fathers had just overthrown their own government, the king, by use of their own firearms brought from home. In the 1700s Americans even owned their own warships and artillery.
Oh Gees….. you again?
All guns can be deemed to be an “assault weapon” if one so desires. These people who are trying to takes guns away from people who are law abiding citizens should be infringement of the United States citizens. Probably 98% of the population use guns to target practice, hunt for food and collectors. The 2% are committing the crimes are getting away with murder! I say this because they aren’t held accountable for any crime they commit unless they’re caught. It’s the law abiding gun owners who pay the price for their actions because it’s easier to force the law abiding citizens into a new law and take away their rights than it is for government to remove and incarcerate the criminals!
Wrong the second amendment is for self defense from a tyrannical government and the more you try to take away our gun rights the more tyrannical you are!
Yes exactly
Never saw any kind of gun ever fire without the help of a human…never saw any knives or swords ever stab or cut anyone without help from a human….never heard of a car running people over on a sidewalk without the help of a human…So the common denominator here are humans.
All schools need resource officers, proper security systems, metal detectors and other appropriate tools to protect our children and schools.
Correct!
We the people can have any weapon we want or can afford, it doesn’t matter what the hell it is, it’s our God given right, the constitution gives us no rights it is there to keep the feds from over stepping their deligated powers.
Why ate we still beating the same dead horse?
Any and all “arms’ are protected. Machine guns, explosives, knives, spears, ect.
Anyone who questions that needs to read the Constitution, some US history, and federalist papers.
I wonder what kind of semi auto rifle the guy in the article uses for pheasant?!
I caught that too. Look at who wrote the article. I can look at her picture and tell she needsto leave hunting and gun stories alone. The computer can spell check but can’t correct what you don’t know about.
Hey all – I spoke with Kisielewski this morning and confirmed that he meant to say shotgun. The article has been adjusted to reflect this.
Hunting pheasants with a rifle? You’re clearly a hunting and firearms expert.
Hey Mike – Thanks for pointing this out. I spoke with Kisielewski this morning and confirmed that he meant to say shotgun. The article has been adjusted to reflect this.
This Perry guy is a scumbag. Wonder what kind of office he’s gonna try to run for with this kind of political bs. CT is a terrible place to live for people who just want to exercise their freedoms. I hate this state.
I hear New Hampshire is nice.
Funny thing is the constitution doesn’t specify what arms so why do they think they get to decide what arms it was talking about
Any form of discrimination against our rights are not gonna work the same rifle that feeds us also protects us and you can never take that right away that same rifle protects us from criminals and all those who try take our god given rights away so you can forget trying to take that away
That’s it. PERIOD. “the right to keep and bear arms! You can’t alter that without throwing away the Constitution, and bill of rights which is what they want to do.
What a joke, maybe they should start going after the police who unload their magazines as fast as possible, with no regard for where those projectiles fly. They are far worse than any semi-auto hunting rifle.
The only weapons that should even be considered as ‘weapons of war’ are full-auto weapons. IMO, no citizen should really have one, or even have a real need of one they are not hunting rifles. The only purpose of full-auto is to suppress shooting towards you in a war zone. And no, the police should not be allowed to have full-auto weapons either, we see how poorly they shoot with semi-auto, if they fire 100 rounds with less than 10 hitting the target, they are the same as any criminal. I remember a time when police were trained to fire once, or twice, than re-aim and readdress the target, and were held accountable for every munition fired. Now they’re worse than the criminals and get away with killing innocent people.
This is a bs case, made to look like they’re trying to do something, instead of actually doing something useful.
Guns is not the problem people had always killed with stick’s rocks knives what ever and in our constitution it says we can own guns and don’t specify what kind so I think anything is fair game they would love to get or guns if they ever do it will be bad just look at other countries they have took them wasn’t good for the people! Not going to stop the killing it’s been happening since the beginning of time it’s not right I agree but if it’s not a gun they will find something else to use hopefully some one with a gun can save people if they try to kill people!
In many countries it did dramatically reduce the shootings.
You don’t hunt peasants with a rifle. The author doesn’t have a clue, to what she said!
Hey David – Thanks for pointing this out. I spoke with Kisielewski this morning and confirmed that he meant to say shotgun. The article has been adjusted to reflect this.
Wait…
For thirty years I’ve heard the left say they weren’t coming for FUDD guns, you know, made for hunting, and not “Weapons of war”, like they’d know.
And now, no legal right for weapons to hunt.
Seems to me, it’s clear.
Connecticut restricts instrumentalities that are unusually dangerous, that are like M16 rifles, that have combat functional features, that allow users to hose down… a battlefield or tragically a school and cause disproportionate number of casualties,” Perry said.
Just listen. Retarded
Well Alex is an idiot because you don’t hunt pheasants with a rifle of any kind so her article is misleading
Hello B – Thanks for pointing this out. I spoke with Kisielewski this morning and confirmed that he meant to say shotgun. The article has been adjusted to reflect this.
The state of Connecticut does not supersede the Federal Government, the Constitution nor the Bill of Rights.
THIS!!
The constitution guarantees right to bear arms. Who the fuck do these douchebags think they are trying to categorize”arms”. Libtard govt over-reach. Fuck them
I seriously doubt that anyone is hunting pheasant with a semiautomatic (or any) rifle. It would be helpful if the writer knew just a bit about guns.
Hey Cecil – Thanks for pointing this out. I spoke with Kisielewski this morning and confirmed that he meant to say shotgun. The article has been adjusted to reflect this. Your point about building up our knowledge base is well-taken and we will be addressing this for all topics moving forward.
Df
Liberals are always attempting to skirt around the 2A, it is NOT a Hunting Privilege nor a self defense prerogative, it does not state a single specific of ‘Arms’ but a generic term the left continually Interprets incorrectly as well takes the sections of the amendment they wish to play interpreter of totally out of context for the amendment.
Need one time for these people to be charged with Unconstitutional actions and sentenced to real jail time to stop this.
Just because somthing or someone looks like something or someone doesnt make it so. Just because an ar15 looks like an m16 or m4 doesnt make it a wepon of war., for looking like one.a man can dress like a woman .is he a woman because he is made to look like one,?people dont hunt or posses an m16 or m60 for hunting.but they do use semie auto rifles and shotguns not weapons of war,people has road that horse and put it up wet to long.stop the stupidity ,people kill people not guns .hell cars and airplanes kill more kids than cancer.ban cancer and cars
If you hate guns remember every dissarmament of citizens has ended in genoside of the un armed, everytime.lets take a close look at isreal and hamas ,how about mexaco what happend when citizens have no guns gangs took over raped murderd and killed the week dissarmed and unprotected, every time people are dissarmed inocent people die.
This is not a joke we jave a god given right to choose what we feel safe with to protect our families.if you dont want a gun fine leave me and mine alone you dont have one fine.dont get one .but dont you dare fuck with my rights as a law abideing citizen.got it democrats .and gun haters don get one if you dont want one leave my rights alone.mind your buisness not mine.gun haters go fishing
The second amendment does not say a specific type of firearm.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Shall not be infringed. The point of 2A is not self defense OR hunting. The purpose of 2A in the constitution is for people to have the ability to fight their own government should it become tyrannical (and under Democrats we have started to see it) . if the government has machine guns, the citizens have machine guns. If the government has tanks and artillery, the people can have tanks and artillery. Financial realities aside, this is why the amendment exists.
Fuck these gun nuts, the NRA can suck my balls!
Fuck right on off with your paranoid delusions
Great when when or if your family or you get into a jam with someone wanting to take your lives because they are a worthless human and somebody is around with a firearm to that person keep walking.
This fuck dose not have a clue
And the amount of trouble you would get it in even thow you a have a permit to carry. Not worth this assholes life why risk yours.
Typical ignorant dem no sense of history no sence of of being a man just a sheep like the rest of the lib’s with. Woke Worthless ideas expecting to be taken kare of if not by the police but also the government. Sheep!!
Well, first you’d need balls to be sucked. It appears you are sorely lacking.
Sounds like Connecticut is so for a swamp drain, just like the rest of the country.
There were several repeating firearms prior to the 2nd A ratification. The founders knew of these weapons advancements which is why the word “ARMS” is used and not muskets. Connecticut is the Constitution State. These legal experts should understand this.
CT needs a new state attorney obviously.
So historical traditions do not recognize hunting?????? The framers all hunted yet they never had hunting and sustenance in mind when they authored the 2nd? Where is the common sense? The 2nd is for self defense and whatever else you may need a gun for like feeding yourself! The woke democrats attacks on our rights knows no boundaries!
Someone somewhere along the line did a crossbreed of vapors with smoke (h mirrors). Please explain to me like I’m five years old about this simi-auto rifle used for hunting pheasant. What caliber, or maybe, gage, is it? What is the manufacturer, name and model?
I’m waiting….
From VA, home of Edgar A. Poe & Capt. John Carter
The second ammendment was put there to rid the country of a corrupt government. It was not to restrict the people, but to restrict the ones not following the Constitution. Get a history lesson. Uphold your oath of office and you won’t be removed from office by the ARMS of the People.
The Constitution says right to bear arm it did not say certain arms it also said a state that does not protect is borders is treasonous and should the need come the tree of liberty must be refreshed with the blood of patriots
What a poorly written article! Semi automatic rifles would never be used to hunt pheasants, partridge, or waterfowl. However, a semi-automatic shotgun would. Rifles and shotguns are very different types of firearms and should never be confused.
Hey Michael – Thanks for pointing this out. I spoke with Kisielewski this morning and confirmed that he meant to say shotgun. The article has been adjusted to reflect this. Thanks again.
It is obvious that CT will be voting Harris in November. I feel sorry for all the good people that live there. Stay strong.
Try this one in the Supreme Court.
Democrats are such schiffs.
I hate living in CT, hate it. I have lived in 17 states in my life. Legally owning registered guns. I moved back to CT to be with family, I was born here. Long story short, I no longer own a gun. I can’t. Seems as though a charge that I had when I was 18 years old (40+ years ago) prevents me from legally owning them. The charge was ‘Mayhem’…I remember actually chuckling when I heard them say it. It was a fight after a football game and there were a bunch of us involved…no one was hurt besides fat lips and bloody noses. No weapons were involved, just kids doing what kids did. This charge was never explained to me by anyone, it never followed me around to other states. I have passed background checks everywhere else. This includes a deep check to work on an AirForce base.
I tried to fight this but can not afford the legal fees, a lawyer and what would probably be years of BS for nothing in the end. Connecticut has repeatedly overstepped it’s Constitutional reach on gun laws in my opinion. The absurdity of some of these laws is beyond belief. To take guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens ( I have had two speeding tickets since ) goes against everything that this state was built on. If I can I will be moving away again. Just to get away from this nanny state. Way to go Connecticut! Now a hunter can’t go out and “hose down” a flock of turkeys. Blue States are the worst!
The rifle in the lead photo is a pellet gun not a firearm.
This attorney/attorneys are wildly incompetent and illiterate given that it was internationally and blatantly written that the government has 0 rights to restrict the purchase of arms. They’re commiting an act of war against the people, aka treason. The only thing in question is intent, are they that criminal or that stupid? Getting what you’ve earned is usually an elated victory, but I have a feeling theirs will put hellraiser to shame.
In case Mr. Perry or Mr. Lamont has forgotten:
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
No where does it say anything about the type of arms, nor does it have provisions for arms that you find scary. Ever think that maybe we have a mental health issue and not a gun issue. Maybe instead of teaching kids that there are an infinite amount of genders, we should be teaching kids basic firearm safety and have a healthy fear and respect for them.
I’m getting such and tired of the lies coming out of Hartford, the right of the people of this great nation to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT be infriged!! Tell this knucklehead that all firearms are protected by the Constitution, and it’s so that we may defend ourselves, mostly against people like you!!! It has nothing to do with hunting!!
So stop your lying and start going after the criminals instead of the law abiding citizens!
And then there are all the folks think that AR means assault rifle, when it actually stands for the manufacturers name: Armalite Rifles
If there was any reason not to vote democrats into office, here it is.
Vote Republican right down the line
Exactly! But people are too brainwashed from the liberal media and the fear mongering.
How are they still trying to diminish our right to bear arms, when crime is skyrocketing, our Country is being invaded, and they hand-cuff police in CT from pursuing offenders? And when criminals are caught committing crimes with ILLEGAL guns, they are given minimum sentences and set free for us to be victim to? Ned has to go. We need new leadership.
Our forefathers greatest knowledge was to know that as smart as they were, they aren’t smart enough to predict the future. Where in the world does the constitution mention right to bear arms only for defensive purposes? It doesn’t. Legally, banning any arms is unconstitutional.
Do current lawyers really think this? Have they not heard of the long range rifle? Designed to kill from a long distance and keep the user safe? How can you say that is sell defense? Gatlin gun? To say that our forefathers mean for self defense in asinine. If so they would have put that in the bill of rights. Stop pretending to think you knew what they meant and take it for what they wrote
.
For everyone getting all worked up about the right for individuals to bear arms. It might interest you to know that WAS NOT a part of the second Ammendment UNTIL the Heller decision in 2008. That’s right, 2008. Before that, it simply read ‘a well regulated militia’. Hey, they got rid of Roe v Wade. Don’t get too comfortable thinking your Constitutional rights are carved in stone. Especially when one former President promises to dismantle our existing Constitution. Once he dismantles the 1st Ammendment, why should he keep the 2nd? Oh cause he keeps his promises and never lies?? 😀
Roe wasn’t in the Constitution. Militia means the people . The Constitution does not grant us rights–it protects God-giving rights from being taken away by.the government
You conveniently left out the part that states ‘the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed’. That’s carved in stone.
If you want my rifle then come and take it
The term ARMS is pretty plain. Arms means any weapon , does not specify a certain type. THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED . IS pretty clear. Time the state residents of Connecticut call for this states attorney to be removed from office.
Damn it they cut off my fingers for making a finger gun
I got half a paragraph in and it said hunting rifles are not protected under the constitution. BS! The second permits it and shall not be infringed upon!
They must not be able to read and comprehend what our constitution said. Shall not infringe. Pretty damn shelf explanatory. But them yankee libturds never had a brain to begin with. F the liberal idiots. Maga!!!!!!!
I own some guns, but I’m not big on the NRA. But when I see information like this, it kind of brings me back to a little bit believing all the hype that they want to take all of your guns. It’s a slippery slope.
I was born and raised in CT. I got my concealed carry at 18 and when hunting season came around I would walk in the front door from work or school and out the back door to go hunt. Back then the state was still pretty conservative and we would have our guns in our vehicle rear window gun rack at high school and go hunting after school. Adam Lanza (Sandy Hook shooter) took all that away from the law abiding citizen. His life story is full of missed opportunities by school personnel and government agencies that to this day fail to take responsibility for what was their responsibility. It’s easier for them to blame an inanament object than take actual responsibility for their failures as supposed educators and so called care takers of our children. One of those lost at Sandy Hook was a close friend to our family and we all grieved over the loss but that doesn’t change where the fault lies.
Well this is b’s your four father give us the right to have guns and be free now if they trie to take that right away there will be a fight and I won’t back down I will defend and stand up for what I know is right. ?%#&;:?????
So hunting rifles are not commonly used for defense, so they are not protected by the constitution. Conversely AR15s which are commonly used in defense are also not protected by the constitution. They are too dangerous…..Therefore any gun or weapon that is not used commonly can be confiscated, or any weapon deemed “too dangerous” can also be confiscated. See how that works? All guns can be taken. We need to try these lawmakers for treason.
All guns are protected and any tyrant that says different needs rope therapy
Does that also mean automatic weapons are legal?
The fk they aren’t! What part of “Shall Not Be infringed” do you not understand Mr. AG? You should be removed from office and disbarred, immediately!
But but but…..Harris/Walz just assured us no one is after our guns. Did they lie? Not the Joyful Duo.
This is simple. At the time the Cobstitution was written many citizens lived outside of cities and towns, often in remote areas. Those people could not survive without their hunting rifles, which in most cases were also their self-defence weapons. It was also the same rifle carried to answer the call to arms of the militia. For those that say we have a standing military and the militia is a thing if the past, I would suggest that even in this modern world the militia is US, we the people.
Seriously? The right to bear arms is pretty clear. There were no specifications for a reason. What makes certain people feel entitled to determine what a “gun” is? Arms dipshits. Deal with it.
“In order to establish and maintain a well regulated militia, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”… so you’re telling me marksmens rifles (almost every hunting rifle would fit this category) and semi auto combat rifles (looking at you AR/AK/those type of guns guys) wouldn’t be essential to the maintenance of a well regulated militia? And wouldn’t the entire idea of maintaining said militia also be in direct contradiction to the liberal cry of “oooh 2A must only protect muskets cuz thats all that was around then!” I may not be a lawyer but it seems pretty damn clear to me that any gun law, short of keeping them out of the hands of felons and the mentally deranged, is unconatitutional.
Where in the 2nd amendment that it only applies to self defense?
The state attorney’s and attorney general should be immediately disbarred and arrested, charged, and prosecuted for felony conspiracy against rights in violation of Title 18 U.S.C. section §241, felony deprivation of rights under color of law in violation of Title 18 U.S.C. section §242, Perjury in violating oath of office swearing false oath which is treason and a felony, insurrection and rebellion against the constitution of the united states,all guns are arms and therefore protected under the second amendment of the constitution of the united states of America supreme law of the land,no state senator, Congressmen, governor, president, or judge has any legal lawful constitutional authority or jurisdiction to pass or enforce any form of gun laws whatsoever anywhere in the united states of America under the supremacy clause, article 4 section 2 paragraph 1, second amendment “shall not be Infringed”clause,9th amendment enumeration clause,14th amendment section 1 “no state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the united states” clause whatsoever, president of the united states, senators, Congressmen, judges are all state officials elected or appointed to a specific state and therefore prohibited any jurisdiction or authority to ban or outlaw any weapons (arms)or weapons parts whatsoever period anywhere in the united states of America. Dangerous and unusual,in common use exists nowhere in the constitution of the united states of America supreme law of the land whatsoever period,all guns in existence and have yet to be invented are protected under the constitution of the united states of America. All gun laws in the united states of America are unconstitutional therefore illegal null void not legally binding or enforceable laws.
Supremacy clause establishes that the constitution of the united states of America is the supreme law of the land it overrides and overrules all other laws.
Article 4 section 2 paragraph 1 Text.
The citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states.
Second amendment Text.
The right of the people to keep and bear arms, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.
14th amendment section 1 TEXT.
NO STATE SHALL MAKE OR ENFORCE ANY LAW WHICH SHALL ABRIDGE THE PRIVILEGES OR IMMUNITIES OF CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES.
The second amendment is the privilege, immunity (right)of every single individual natural born or naturalized American citizens in the united states of America.
The judge and these state attorneys must be immediately removed from their offices and prosecuted for their treasonous high crimes against the constitution of the united states of America and the people of the united states of America.