The war on America’s rifle might be coming to an end sooner than later. At least the viable war. We’ve already reported about the GVR on the Maryland case, with the Supreme Court telling the lower court they need to do a do-over on the so-called “assault weapons” prohibitions there. We’ve also discussed two recently filed cases in New Jersey, the Rogers case, backed by Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs, and the Cheeseman case, backed by the Firearms Policy Coalition. All of these suits take aim at the silly restrictions placed on normal semi-automatic rifles based on cosmetic features, or ones that actually make them safer. The Firearms Policy Coalition recently announced that they’ve launched a new suit in New York, attacking their prohibitions on the AR Variant firearms.

BREAKING: FPC files lawsuit challenging New York “assault weapons’ ban as unconstitutional https://t.co/DhWnpe7dcK

— Firearms Policy Coalition (@gunpolicy) July 12, 2022

The case is Vanchoff_v_James and was filed on July 12, 2022.

Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced today that it has filed a new Second Amendment lawsuit challenging New York’s ban on so-called “assault weapons.” The complaint in Vanchoff v. James, along with other case information, can be viewed at FPCLegal.org.

 “Enough is enough,” said FPC policy counsel Matthew Larosiere “the people of New York have suffered this abuse for far too long. The arms targeted by New York’s ban are ordinary arms, kept by ordinary people for ordinary–but extremely important–purposes, including the fundamental right to an effective self-defense. There is no justification for threatening peaceable people with long stints in a government cage for merely possessing a firearm, regardless of what that particular firearm looks like. With this suit, we hope to end this injustice that has for too long imperiled New Yorkers.”

 “There is no constitutionally relevant difference between a semi-automatic handgun, shotgun, and rifle,” the brief explains. “While some exterior physical attributes may differ—wood vs. metal stocks and furniture, the number and/or location of grips, having a bare muzzle vs. having muzzle devices, different barrel lengths, etc.—they are, in all relevant respects, the same.”

Adding this suit to the other three east coast filings is undoubtedly going to contribute to the stress put on the progressives to defend this nonsense. Paired with the California case currently in limbo over at the 9th circuit, it’s quite possible we’ll be seeing the complete dismantling of prohibitions on most hardware related laws. The complaint points at the the absurdity of these kinds of bans.

Rifles built on an AR-style platform are a paradigmatic example of the type of arm New York bans. AR-15 rifles are among the most popular firearms in the nation, and they are owned by millions of Americans. A recent survey of gun owners indicates that about 24.6 million Americans have owned up to 44 million AR-15 or similar rifles. See William English, 2021 National Firearms Survey: Updated Analysis Including Types of Firearms Owned at 1 (May 13,
2022), https://bit.ly/3yPfoHw. And according to industry sources, more than one out of every five firearms sold in recent years were rifles of the type banned by New York. Nat’l Shooting Sports Found., Inc., Firearms Retailer Survey Report, 2013 at 11.

While we all know that the anti-gun politicians and elitist pigs of New York, New Jersey, California, etc. will do everything in their power to continue to restrict the Second Amendment, they’ll eventually have to give up when normal Mr. and Mrs. Joe Schmo America says they’re tired of paying for losing lawsuits in their respective states. For advocates, they pay either way, in the way of supporting these organizations and through their tax dollars, so we lose when we win. But when we win, we sure do win!