Take the case of Judge Robert O'Neill of the California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District. Basically this guy just doesn't know what he is talking about.
In his decision here he goes on to talk at length about semi-auto civilian market AKs. He goes on about so called "assault weapons".
Although James acknowledged the "fully automatic nature of a machine gun renders such a weapon arguably more dangerous and unusual than a semiautomatic assault weapon, that observation does not negate the fact that assault weapons, like machine guns, are not in common use by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes and likewise fall within the category of dangerous and unusual weapons that the government can prohibit for individual useI've explained all the technicalities in previous entries already. The technology behind the AK is over 100 years old. Semi-automatic technology has been in use for over 100 years in the civilian market. As I said, there is no such thing as an "assault weapon" meaning that semi-automatic rifles ARE in fact in common use by law-abiding citizens.
This is the Browning 22, it is a semi-auto rifle designed by John Browning, and produced in 1914.
Conceptually they're the same as the semi-auto AKs. A part of the energy used to propel the bullet is used to cycle the action and automatically load in the next bullet. So what does this all mean then? It means that Judge Robert O'Neill is dead wrong when he says these guns are not in common use by law-abiding citizens. They've been in common use for decades before his parents even thought about having him.
So when you walk into a courtroom as a new lawyer, or some other capacity, don't feel intimidated by the judge. Odds are he's probably just as dumb as you.
