The argument that commercially available, AR-type firearms are somehow less dangerous or lethal simply because they fire only in semi-automatic mode is misleading. They retain the identical performance capabilities and characteristics (save full-automatic capability) as initially intended for use in combat. [More]
Oh, is that all? Spread that lie under oath!
Also from the linked Exhibit:
As mentioned previously in this report, many of the firearms prohibited by the Ordinances directly trace their origins to those developed for use in combat. As such, these firearms were never initially intended for general distribution or sale to the public.
Except if we’re talking ARs, and of course he is, guess which one came first:
“Colt sent a pilot model rifle (serial no. GX4968) to the BATF for civilian sale approval on Oct. 23, 1963. It was approved on Dec. 10, 1963, and sales of the ‘Model R6000 Colt AR-15 SP1 Sporter Rifle’ began on Jan 2, 1964,” one critic of the article contended. “The M16 wasn’t issued to infantry units until 1965 (as the XM16E1), wasn’t standardized as the M16A1 until 1967, and didn’t officially replace the M14 until 1969.”
Tell me this Yurgealitis trough feeder isn’t cognizant of Founding intent and is incentivized by those who fear that and obscure it through gaslighting.
And tangentially related:
As predicted, they’re taking full advantage of Scalia’s critical error.
In re later “Bowie knives” edicts and the like, does anyone have a record of such laws ever being challenged on Second Amendment grounds and such bans being upheld and/or appealed to a higher court?
