Machine gun bans are constitutional, according to a federal appeals court, which ruled that the government can regulate full-auto devices.
In a 16-page opinion, the Sixth Circuit Court upheld the conviction of Jaquan Bridges for possessing an unregistered machine gun.
Bridges, 22, was arrested in Memphis, Tennessee, after almost striking a police vehicle on a highway and shooting at officers as he attempted to flee the scene. Police discovered a Glock 23 fitted with a switch attached when Bridges was arrested. The switch allowed Bridges to convert the Glock from a semi-auto to a full-auto firearm.
He was later indicted on one count of possession of a machine gun, which he moved to dismiss. Ultimately, his motion to dismiss was denied, and he eventually pleaded guilty to the charge.
However, Bridges later appealed the conviction, arguing that machine guns are included in the definition of “arms” written in the Second Amendment and are ubiquitous enough to warrant protection under 2A.
The case landed before a three-judge panel in the Sixth Circuit, where the appellate panel disagreed with Bridges’ assertion that machine guns are “common.”
Bridges provided data that there are currently 740,000 total registered machine guns in the U.S. Attorneys for the government countered that most of those are registered to law enforcement and should not be counted.
The government said machine guns registered to private citizens are closer to 174,000, most grandfathered in pre-ban.
After hearing arguments, the judges ultimately sided with the U.S. government. The panel ultimately concluded that the banning of machine guns and parts that convert guns into machine guns is not unconstitutional and falls well within the definition of the U.S. Supreme Court’s Heller decision.
Writing the opinion, U.S. Circuit Judge Richard Griffin, a George W. Bush appointee, explained that the statute — 18 U.S.C. 922(o) – is in line with the historical precedent of preventing citizens from possessing “dangerous and unusual” weaponry.
“Machineguns are both dangerous and unusual — not weapons typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes,” Griffin wrote in the opinion. “Accordingly, §922(o)’s ban on machinegun possession is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.”
2 Leave a Reply
Just look at Chicago. A lot of those guys are running temu switches on their Glocks.
So let me get this straight, the federal government makes it virtually impossible for everyday citizens to obtain machine guns and then rules on a criminal case based on the fact that machine guns aren't "common"??? lmao how ridiculously tyrannical.