Recently, the US 7th Circuit Court illegally upheld the ban on semi-automatic guns and high-capacity magazines, stating that it “makes the public feel safer.”

According to the Second Amendment, there is no room for emotional arguments, simply that the people of the US have the right to keep and bear arms. These arms are not stated, described or limited. Neither are guns prohibited nor was this law was intended to help create a “reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia.”

Using an emotional argument for upholding a ruling is immature and simply emasculates the law. Judges take an oath that requires them to uphold the law when serving in office. This oath requires them to withhold the liberties of the people and the Constitution of the United States.

The ban on semi-automatic rifle magazines is essentially magazines that contain more than 10 rounds of ammunition. The court upheld the claim that popular firearms, such as AR-15s, do not have constitutional immunity from the federal government and therefore are not subject to the Second Amendment.

In fact, this is something that is not new to the court system. In 1934, “Judge Ann Claire Williams … noted that the National Firearms Act of 1934 … regulat[ed] fully automatic firearms, something that is also unconstitutional.” This means that our citizen’s rights have slowly been infringed upon, which should cause citizens to be concerned and fearful. Every small right that is taken away is part of a larger constitutional violation.

The Constitution does not give judges the authority to re-write the Constitution, especially the Second Amendment. Once again, this amendment simply gives people the right to “keep and bear arms.” Making emotionally arguments and representing the public’s so-called emotional state is simply ridiculous and a prime example of judges not following their legal judicial duties.

In fact, studies show that mass shooting are indeed rare, but the liberal media actually places so much emphasis on these events that most of the American public believes they are more common than statistics prove.

In this latest gun case, the judge stated “military-grade weapons … [are] dangerous and unusual weapons.” This misinterpretation fails to represent the true intend of the Second Amendment, which does not include any language about dangerous weapons or military-grade devices.

While most politicians that are against guns are liberals, this is not true. In fact, this panel of judges was appointed by Ronald Reagan and the popular politician Ted Cruz. True, the Brady Bill was President Bill Clinton’s product and President Obama rallies for stricter gun regulations. However, when gun owners turn out to vote, they should conduct thorough research about the representatives that they are representing and their Second Amendment gun rights.


Techna Clip is an innovative leader in developing concealed carry gun belt clips. They specialize in a Sig Sauer gun clip, Ruger LC9 clip and other popular handheld guns. They are a leading supporter in concealed carry weapons and gun rights.