Oh, Bren L4. Soon You Shall Be MIne.

By Mitch Berg

A US District Judge in Mississippi rules that the ban on fully-automatic weapons violates the Bruen decision.

He wasn’t happy about it – but he made the ruling:

In his ruling, Judge Carlton Reeves, an Obama appointee, made no bones at all about the fact that he hated what he was doing, but under Bruen — of which he is also not a fan — the law is very clear.

The Supreme Court has, of course, ruled that gun control laws like the machinegun ban can be justified in the case of firearms that are “dangerous and unusual.” Judge Reeves, however, ruled that while machineguns are dangerous, they are not, in fact, unusual. And we can thank the work product of the great legal minds of the US Department of Justice for their failure to argue that machineguns are rare. As the judge noted . . .

Bruen nevertheless tells us that there is an American “historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of ‘dangerous and unusual weapons.’” 597 U.S. at 21 (quoting Heller, 554 U.S. at 626). That is the law to be followed. The ultimate problem for the government, then, is this: although machineguns are “dangerous,” it does not explain how machineguns are unusual.  …

The Morgan case raised by Mr. Brown says there were more than 740,000 machineguns lawfully possessed in the United States in 2021. 2024 WL 3936767, at *4 (citing ATF data). The government has not pointed to any other number. The Court accepts it as true.

Seven hundred and forty thousand is no small number.7  The government presents no argument or explanation for why such a large figure is somehow not common. Merriam Webster’s dictionary defines common as, among other things, “widespread.”8 Three-quarters of a million of any kind of firearm is plainly widespread. 

The government also failed to show any historical evidence that banning machineguns would be consistent with gun laws at the founding.

It appears the legal and legislative sharks are circling the National Firearms Act.

Don’t get irrationally exuberant just yet:

Let’s be clear here. This ruling came in a criminal case and applies only to Justin Brown. Don’t head over to your local gun store expecting to buy full auto M4 any time soon.

The question now is, what happens next…whether or not the DOJ chooses to appeal the case to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Yes, the Fifth is probably the most gun-friendly circuit in the nation. But they’ve also ruled in the past that machineguns are both dangerous and unusual. That, however, was before Bruen. And you can bet that if the Brown decision is appealed, the DOJ will come up with arguments supporting its contention that guns with giggle-switches are, in fact, rare.

 

So it’s too early to start shopping.

But not window-shopping.

6 Responses to “Oh, Bren L4. Soon You Shall Be MIne.”

  1. bosshoss429 Says:

    I personally know three people that own machine guns and all three have FFLs. The most extensive of the collections that I have had the privilege to view and handle, is owned by the founder and former owner of Minnesota based DPMS Panther arms. It is comprised of not only U.S. made weapons, but those from other countries, as well. Most of them are WWI and II era.

  2. John "Bigman" Jones Says:

    A judge who rules on the law as written rather than imposing his personal preference? Refreshing.

    The ‘dangerous and unusual’ test is amusing and annoying. Its amusing because ALL firearms are dangerous. That’s inherent in a self-defense tool whether it’s a pocket pistol, switch blade knife or shillelagh club. And it’s the entire point of a militia weapon (the Second Amendment was not written because the Founders feared certain weapons but because they feared certain governments).

    The test is annoying because the reason some items are unusual today is the government unconstitutionally banned them 100 years ago. We shouldn’t lose our rights now because of their unlawful act then.

    Still, this is an excellent beginning. 👌

  3. SmithStCrx Says:

    On their podcast Advisory Opinions, David French and Sarah Isgur described this ruling as “Malicious Compliance” by the Obama Judge. Their theory is that he’s trying to create an upswell of opposition against the Bruen Decision.
    Honestly, they could be correct. I’d have to see more Rulings from this particular Judge to see if he routinely cites precedents he’s opposed to. OTOH, for a couple of people that claim to be “conservative legal pundits,” David and Sarah have routinely come down on the side of gun control, including Red Flag Laws. This is also the same David French that claimed he was endorsing the Pro-Abortion Kamala Harris because Donald Trump wasn’t Pro-Life enough.

  4. ArthurRadley Says:

    Even, if after becoming legal to purchase without a federal tax stamp and bg check an M4 won’t get below $2500.

    And with a cyclical rate of ~800/min that’s $80 for one minute’s fun. A quality semi auto AR is more practical and affordable.

    On top of that, in states like California, IL, NY, NJ (and MN soon), a 10 rnd, non removable magazine makes even 3 rnd burst impractical.

  5. In The Mailbox: 02.11.25 : The Other McCain Says:

    […] Shark Tank: DeSantis, Perez, & Albritton Hug It Out Over Illegal Immigration Shot In The Dark: Oh, Bren L4, Soon You Shall Be Mine, also, Constant STUMP: On Social Security Old Age Benefits Fraud,  The Political Hat: Bird […]

  6. John "Bigman" Jones Says:

    Trump should get our M4s back from the Taliban and sell them through the Civilian Marksmanship Program

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

--> Site Meter -->