The New and Very Dangerous Common Use Test (And How to Combat It)

This video, presented by William Kirk of Washington Gun Law, critically analyzes a dangerous new interpretation of the 'Common Use Test' being applied in recent court cases. The speaker explains how courts are attempting to narrow the test from general 'common possession' to 'common use for self-defense,' thereby potentially excluding firearms like AR-platform rifles from Second Amendment protection. Kirk argues against this shift, emphasizing that the right to 'keep' arms for lawful purposes, including self-defense, is protected regardless of the frequency of active firing.

Quick Summary

The 'Common Use Test' protects firearms in common lawful use. A dangerous new interpretation narrows this to 'common use for self-defense,' potentially excluding popular firearms like AR-15s by focusing on active firing frequency rather than lawful possession for defense.

Chapters

  1. 00:00Introduction to the Common Use Test
  2. 00:48Key Legal Cases: Oregon and Washington
  3. 01:35Origins of the Common Use Test
  4. 02:39The Shift to 'Common Use for Self-Defense'
  5. 04:17Combatting the New Test in Banta v. Ferguson
  6. 06:47Possession vs. Active Use
  7. 08:53Statistical Reality of Lawful Ownership
  8. 10:04The Handgun Analogy
  9. 11:10Conclusion on 'Dangerous and Unusual'

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the 'Common Use Test' in Second Amendment law?

The 'Common Use Test,' established in Heller and Bruen, states that the government can only restrict firearms that are both 'dangerous and unusual,' not those commonly possessed for lawful purposes like self-defense.

How are courts misinterpreting the 'Common Use Test'?

Some judges are narrowing the test from general 'common possession' to 'common use for self-defense,' arguing that a firearm must be frequently fired in actual self-defense to be protected, which is a flawed interpretation.

Why is the 'common use for self-defense' interpretation dangerous?

This interpretation could exclude popular firearms like AR-platform rifles from Second Amendment protection, despite their widespread lawful ownership and possession for self-defense, by focusing on active firing frequency rather than lawful possession.

What is the statistical argument for protecting AR-platform rifles?

With 6-8 million AR-platform rifles in circulation and a lawful ownership rate of 99.999995%, the state bears a high burden to prove these firearms are primarily used for unlawful purposes to justify restrictions.

Related News

All News →

More 2nd Amendment & Law Videos You Might Like

More from Washington Gun Law

View all →