Judge finds for Mass. in challenge of gun ban
Assault rifles declared weapon of military use
BOSTON — Assault weapons and large-capacity magazines are not protected by the Second Amendment, a federal judge said in a ruling Friday upholding Massachusetts’ ban on the weapons.
U.S. District Judge William Young dismissed a lawsuit challenging the 20-year-old ban, saying assault weapons are military firearms that fall beyond the reach of the constitutional right to “bear arms.”
Regulation of the weapons is a matter of policy, not one for the courts, he said.
“Other states are equally free to leave them unregulated and available to their law-abiding citizens,” Young said. “These policy matters are simply not of constitutional moment.
Americans are not afraid of bumptious, raucous and robust debate about these matters. We call it democracy.”
State Attorney General Maura Healey said the ruling “vindicates the right of the people of Massachusetts to protect themselves from these weapons of war.”
AR-15 assault-style rifles are under increased scrutiny because of their use in several recent mass shootings, including the February massacre at a Florida high school.
The Gun Owners’ Action League of Massachusetts and other groups that filed the lawsuit argued that the AR15 cannot be considered a “military weapon” because it cannot fire in fully automatic mode.
But Young dismissed that argument, noting that the semi-automatic AR-15’S design is based on guns “that were first manufactured for military purposes” and that the AR-15 is “common and well-known in the military.”
Young also upheld Healey’s 2016 enforcement notice to gun sellers and manufacturers clarifying what constitutes a “copy” or “duplicate” weapon under the state’s 1998 assault weapon ban, including copies of the Colt AR-15 and the AK-47.