From firearms-alert-owner Tue Jul 12 19:44:36 1994 Received: from localhost (chan@localhost) by jobe.shell.portal.com (8.6.4/8.6.5) id TAA03352 for firearms-alert-outgoing; Tue, 12 Jul 1994 19:43:04 -0700 Received: from nova.unix.portal.com (nova.unix.portal.com [156.151.1.101]) by jobe.shell.portal.com (8.6.4/8.6.5) with ESMTP id TAA03346 for ; Tue, 12 Jul 1994 19:43:02 -0700 Received: from gatekeeper.nra.org ([192.156.97.62]) by nova.unix.portal.com (8.6.7/8.6.5) with SMTP id TAA12362 for ; Tue, 12 Jul 1994 19:43:00 -0700 Received: by gatekeeper.nra.org (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA06436; Tue, 12 Jul 1994 22:41:31 -0400 Date: Tue, 12 Jul 1994 22:41:31 -0400 Message-Id: <9407130241.AA06436@gatekeeper.nra.org> Reply-To: alerts@gatekeeper.nra.org Originator: rkba-alert@nra.org From: alerts@gatekeeper.nra.org (NRA Alerts) To: firearms-alert@shell.portal.com Subject: RELEASE: GUN BAN IS 'UNCONSTITUTIONALLY VAGUE,' says Federal Judge X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Comment: NRA Alerts list Sender: firearms-alert-owner@shell.portal.com Precedence: bulk Status: R WHERE POSSIBLE, PLEASE DISTRIBUTE THIS TO YOUR LOCAL MEDIA OUTLETS - NEWSPAPER, RADIO, TV... FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE FOR INFORMATION CONTACT: July 12, 1994 Bill Powers, 703-267-3820 GUN BAN IS "UNCONSTITUTIONALLY VAGUE," SAYS FEDERAL JUDGE NRA hails U.S. Court of Appeals decision to strike down Columbus, Ohio ban on semiautomatic firearms (WASHINGTON, DC) -- Declaring the law "unconstitutionally vague," the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit struck down a ban on so-called semiautomatic "assault weapons" in Columbus, Ohio. The July 11, 1994 opinion, written by Chief Judge Gilbert S. Merritt, was hailed as a major victory for the rights of law-abiding citizens and gun owners. "The court recognized the obvious," said Tanya Metaksa, chief lobbyist for the National Rifle Association, "that these kinds of gun bans do nothing but subject law-abiding citizens to confusing, arbitrary and discriminatory regulation and enforcement. Now it's time for the politicians to recognize that fact." In the opinion, Merritt called the ban on 46 specific firearms and "other models by the same manufacturer with the same action design that have slight modifications or enhancements" to be vague. Merritt stated that "the ordinance is fundamentally irrational and impossible to apply consistently by the buying public, the sportsman, the law enforcement officer, the prosecutor or the judge." The court concluded that, due to the "arbitrary nature" of the ordinance, which "the city council simply copied" from a similar California law, the entire gun ban is void. The challenge to the Columbus ban was supported by NRA's Firearms Civil Rights Legal Defense Fund. "This is a big victory for all who believe in our civil rights," Metaksa said. "And it should serve as a reminder to Congress that banning lawful firearms ownership is not an answer to crime or any other problem." -- nra -- -- This information is presented as a service to the Internet community by the NRA/ILA. Many files are available via anonymous ftp from ftp.nra.org and via WWW at http://www.nra.org Be sure to subscribe to rkba-alert by sending: subscribe rkba-alert Your Full Name as the body of a message to rkba-alert-request@NRA.org Information can also be obtained by connecting to the NRA-ILA GUN-TALK BBS at (703) 719-6406.