Gun owners tend to think favorably of the 5th Circuit, because it’s the circuit that Emerson came out of, but they’ve been on a roll lately with unfavorable decisions. This latest one they argue that the right to bear arms only covers arms in general, and not one specific firearm. What? So let me get this straight, the police can come into my house, take all my firearms, not charge me with anything, and that’s not a violation of my rights because I can always go buy new ones?
The right protected by the Second Amendment is not a property-like right to a specific firearm, but rather a right to keep and bear arms for self-defense.
I’d be curious to know what the case law is on something like this in a First Amendment context. Can the police seize a printing press from a newspaper, fail to file any charges, and keep the press? Would this create a viable First Amendment complaint?
Very interesting is that Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod, the dissenting judge in this case, brings up, once again, Judge Kavanaugh’s dissent in the Heller II case in the D.C. Circuit. I may have more to say about this later. But I think Judge Kavanaugh was on to something when he penned that dissent.