Maryland AWB case Snope v Brown going to SCOTUS. (Formerly Bianchi v Brown & Bianchi v Frosh)

Dennis in MA said:
Could you imagine how bad Maura's 2025 would be? Have to give up the illegals while claiming they are valuable citizens (depsite us paying $ to house them in hotels and feed them - how are they valuable citizens???). Have to allow any firearm "in common use" in teh UnCommonwealth? The poor old gal will keel over and die with that 1-2 punch.
Click to expand...

The government actually makes having all of these illegals worse than it would be without their intervention.

1) if it was the good old days, when illegals just snuck in, then they would have motivation to work. No assistance from uncle sugar and the need to keep things on the downlow.

2) Everyone now is claiming asylum. If you claim asylum you
a. Get all kinds of help including housing, cell phones, and cash for food.
b. instructed that even if you DO want to work and be a productive member of society, you CAN'T. And if you violate this, it can put your asylum claim in jeopardy.

So illegals are now getting free government crap, and are discouraged from working even if they want to.

I write this as someone who grew lived on the CT shoreline for decades. If it wasn't for hard working illegals in my area the hotel, restaurant and construction industtries would implode.
The key is to get the ones that want to work in quickly while vetting them to make sure they aren't terrorists. And no benefits, well, maybe medicaid and childcare. So they can work.
 
Last edited:
The trick is to keep all illegals out, no matter how cheap they're willing to work. By virtue of breaking the law to come into the country they have demonstrated that they should not be allowed in the country.


dcmdon said:
The government actually makes having all of these illegals worse than it would be without their intervention.

1) if it was the good old days, when illegals just snuck in, then they would have motivation to work. No assistance from uncle sugar and the need to keep things on the download.

2) Everyone now is claiming asylum. If you claim asylum you
a. Get all kinds of help including housing, cell phones, and cash for food.
b. instructed that even if you DO want to work and be a productive member of society, you CAN'T. And if you violate this, it can put your asylum claim in jeopardy.

So illegals are now getting free government crap, and are discouraged from working even if they want to.

I write this as someone who grew lived on the CT shoreline for decades. If it wasn't for hard working illegals in my area the hotel, restaurant and construction industtries would implode.
The key is to get the ones that want to work in quickly while vetting them to make sure they aren't terrorists. And no benefits, well, maybe medicaid and childcare. So they can work.
Click to expand...
 
Garys said:
Didn't Miller determine that only weapons suitable for military use were protected by the Second Amendment? By reasoning of the 4CA, then not only AR15s, but M-16s are protected and should be available to non Prohibited Persons.
Click to expand...

"Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939) Only weapons that have a reasonable relationship to the effectiveness of a well-regulated militia under the Second Amendment are free from government regulation."

The firearm in question was a sawed-off shotgun possessed by Miller.

I would like to introduce that 1939 court to the M26 12-Gauge Modular Accessory Shotgun System (MASS), effectively used by the military for breaching.

LlxE0kF.png


I guess this means short barreled shotguns for all [rockon]


🐯
 
Last edited:
CatSnoutSoup said:
"Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939) Only weapons that have a reasonable relationship to the effectiveness of a well-regulated militia under the Second Amendment are free from government regulation."

The firearm in question was a sawed-off shotgun possessed by Miller.

I would like to introduce that 1939 court to the M26 12-Gauge Modular Accessory Shotgun System (MASS), effectively used by the military for breaching.

LlxE0kF.png


I guess this means short barreled shotguns for all [rockon]


🐯
Click to expand...
SBS's had been used effectively in trench warfare before Miller but there was no one there to argue that.
 
Last edited:
El_Guapo77 said:

View: https://x.com/gunpolicy/status/1861448722363609307?t=GUKknmPP68T4DeFExJ19cQ&s=19
Click to expand...


That was a quick turnaround. Snope replied on the 25th and the next day the SCOUTS clerks had the case distributed.

So conference on Friday the 13th, and if not held for another conference, could mean we hear if it has been granted as early as Monday the 16th.

If it is granted then what are the odds we see a deep state, Las Vegas style, false flag between then and the time arguments are heard in the spring?

Yeah call me paranoid.


🐯
 
CatSnoutSoup said:
One week from today till conference.

I sure hope Friday the 13th is unlucky for the gun grabbers and not for us.

🐯
Click to expand...
I've heard several Gun Tubers say they think SCOTUS will not decide this conference but will re-list it to January's conference. Something about ensuring Dotted I's and Crossed T's. I hope not but we'll see.
 
Nightshift said:
I've heard several Gun Tubers say they think SCOTUS will not decide this conference but will re-list it to January's conference. Something about ensuring Dotted I's and Crossed T's. I hope not but we'll see.
Click to expand...
There’s no more I’s and T’s

Snopes was already GVRd once and now it’s back again. Snopes is bianchi with a new name.
 

”The Supreme Court has heard two major Second Amendment cases in three years, but no rest for the weary: This month the Justices are expected to consider whether to take Snope v. Brown, an appeal challenging a Maryland law that bans the sale and possession of “assault weapons.” That includes the AR-15 style, sometimes called America’s most popular rifle.”
 
All punting this case does is cause several other AWB challenges in the US Circuit Court of Appeals pipeline to be decided in favor of the state (i.e. upholding AWB's). Could end up with two or three other AWB cases all being appealed to SCOTUS in 2025/2026 in addition to MD's rescheduled AWB challenge. SCOTUS could have nipped this in the bud but it appears they (probably Roberts) chose not to for what ever reason.
 
general disorder said:
It seems the supreme court is doing everything in its power to not take up an assault weapons ban case but the states keep pushing them to do so.
Click to expand...
I think SCOTUS knows they would have to overturn an AWB because they are unconstitutional, but they don’t want the political fall out so they will just keep ignoring them.
 
Jsfitzgerald85 said:
I think SCOTUS knows they would have to overturn an AWB because they are unconstitutional, but they don’t want the political fall out so they will just keep ignoring them.
Click to expand...
Two tier judiciary for a two tier justice system.

SCOTUS has severe apprehension about striking down a state level 2A case. They have no issues striking down city level 2A cases.
 

Similar threads

Garland v. VanDerStok
Replies
0
Views
103
lutstribe
L
SCOTUS denies cert on two 2A cases.
Replies
2
Views
360
MickeyD’s
M
Run to Home Base Fundraising
Replies
1
Views
79
Severus Semi-Auto Snape
Severus Semi-Auto Snape
What states still have “94” AWB in place?
Replies
10
Views
526
Dennis in MA
Dennis in MA
  • Poll Poll
Which gun to shoot for complete gun n00b?
2
Replies
56
Views
745
Cuz
Cuz
Back
Top Bottom