700 federal agents based in Boston set out in the pre-dawn hours in hopes of confiscating military-grade weapons and ammunition being stockpiled by anti-government extremists. They also hoped to arrest two leaders of the anti-government group.

It didn’t go very well for them, exactly 241 years ago.

Today, a ideologically-corrupted judge on the ironically named “Constitution State” is presiding over a case that does an end-run both around federal law (the Protection of Lawful Commerce In Arms Act, or PLCAA) and the natural human right to bear arms reflected in the Second Amendment of the Constitution, which reads:

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

At the time the Founding Fathers ratified the Second Amendment in 1791, every citizen of the fledgling United States had the unquestioned and unrestricted right to own any firearm he or she desired.

Historical illiterates on the radical left—including most of the upper echelon of the modern Democrat Party—insist that “Arms” of the time could only mean muskets.

In fact, the Founding Fathers made it very clear that every weapon of war imagined at the time was to be owned by the American people, without restriction.

“The militia of these free commonwealths, entitled and accustomed to their arms, when compared with any possible army,  must be tremendous and irresistible. Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American … the unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.”

The known weapon technologies of the day included muskets, shotguns, revolvers, hand grenades, rockets, cannon, mortars, howitzers, warships, submarines, auto-cannon like the Puckle gun, machine guns like Belton’s Improved gun (requested for the Continental Army by General George Washington), and yes, even a fast-firing, nearly silent rifle with a 20-round detachable magazine called the Girandoni. the later was owned by Thomas Jefferson himself.

Progressives would no doubt seek to ban it as an “assault weapon” in the bed-wetting states in the Northeast and in California.

Connecticut Superior Court Judge Barbara Bellis is the latest smug usurper of liberty acting against the best interests of the citizenry of the United States, as she allows a frivolous lawsuit to proceed that would outlaw every firearm with even the vaguest link to a military origin, which would of course mean all of them.

A Connecticut judge ruled Thursday that a lawsuit against the manufacturer of the gun used in the Sandy Hook shootings, and other companies, can move forward.

A Connecticut Superior Court judge denied a motion to dismiss the lawsuit against the companies involved in the manufacturing, distribution and sale of the rifle used in the deadly 2012 shootings.

Adam Lanza used a Bushmaster AR-15 rifle in the Sandy Hook Elementary School shootings on Dec. 14, 2012 to kill 26 people in less than five minutes. The families of the victims, which included 20 children, have sued the maker, distributor and seller of the rifle, arguing that the military-style gun should have never been available for civilians to purchase.

Connecticut State Judge Barbara Bellis rejected the gun companies’ argument that a 2005 federal law can protect gun businesses from civil lawsuits.

Liberty-hating ambulance-chaser Joshua Koskoff and his fellow progressive allies are attempting to exploit an unspeakable crime carried out by a vicious individual and parlay that into an attack on the right to bear arms in the United States itself.

The goal of the this lawsuit, filed by a vengeful, bitter, and tiny subgroup of the families who lost loved ones at Sandy Hook, is an attempt to establish the legal precedent to sue the manufacturer of any “military-style gun” with even a remote military pedigree out of business.

That clearly means all semi-automatic rifles, but also includes bolt-action rifles, lever-action rifles, pump-action shotguns, and of course, all modern pistols and revolvers.

Their clear intent is to establish a beachhead to sue the American firearms industry into oblivion, and make it impossible for the American people to exercise their natural right to keep and bear arms for their defense, the defense of their families, their communities, their states, and the Republic itself.

Judge Bellis needs to be be reigned in, before she opens a Pandora’s box that she apparently lacks the intelligence an foresight to fathom.