Here Are All The Problems With California’s Expert Witness Testimony In Gun Ban Case

The Supreme Court might eventually hear challenges from Democrat-state laws that ban rifles Americans most frequently acquire for legitimate reasons, including self- or collective defense. Rupp v. BontaThe lawsuit, which challenges California’s ban on the practice, is in motion as we speak. Its outcome could depend on the opinions of veterans of the United States Marine Corps that the federal judge who is handling the case.

The Ninth Circuit remanded it to Judge Josephine Staton of U.S. District Court for Central District of California (Western Division) for further consideration, given the Supreme Court’s decision. New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022) Gun-related restrictions that are inconsistent with national history and tradition are unconstitutional. This argument was made by Brett Kavanaugh, then-Judge (now Supreme Court Justice), in his dissent. District of Columbia v. Heller (2011).

If Judge Staton follows BruenCalifornia’s ban will be removed. It’s simple. It mainly targets semi-automatic rifles with detachable ammunition magazines. They have been in use for more than 100 years. The Remington Model 8 was first designed for hunting and then used for combat (two of these were used by law-enforcement officers in the famous Ambush of Bonnie and Clyde). It was introduced in 1905. Numerous M1 Carbines have been owned by Americans since 1942.

The most commonly owned rifle of the type today — the AR-15 — was introduced in 1963. California was not the first to ban firearms until 1989. Eight other states followed the lead and now only one third of the U.S. population is affected.

Congress placed a ban on certain substances from 1994 to 2004. However, it was less restrictive than California’s ban in that it allowed “banned” Firearms can be modified in the following manner: Six months following the “ban” In a CBS “60 Minutes” segment titled “What Assault Weapons Ban?” Reporter Leslie Stahl pointed out that “assault weapons are still … sold by the thousands,” Named 1994 “the best year for the sales of assault weapons ever.”

California’s ban against the use of marijuana in California will also fail if Judge Staton complies with the Supreme Court’s guidance in two other cases. In United States v. Miller (1939) The court stated that the right of keeping and bearing arms also includes weapons that can actually be used “contribute to the common defense.” Und in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008). The court concluded that Miller The right to be recognized was also “weapons … in common use.” American have purchased an estimated 24,446,000 AR-15s since 1990.

David Kopel of the Independence Institute/Cato Institute pointed out that five U.S. Courts of Appeals ignored or mischaracterized Supreme Court decisions and were upheld “assault weapon” Anti-gun activists’ false descriptions of guns’ power and fire rates justifies bans.

Californians who support the ban hope for the same outcome when Judge Staton reconsiders. Rupp. California called in retired Marine Corps Colonel Craig Tucker to testify. Tucker is associated with Michael Bloomberg’s anti-gun activist group Everytown. Tucker claimed that AR-15s were almost identical to M16/M4 rifles used by military personnel for defense purposes but that they are not suitable for American civilian use.

Here is my critique of Tucker’s testimony. Some things deserve more attention. He claimed to have been able to carry an M4 in Iraq. However, he stated that the rifle was intended to use.223 Remington ammunition. Instead, it’s designed to use 5.56x45mm bullets. He claimed that the standard combat load in the military was 120 rounds and four magazines. In reality, it is 210 rounds with seven magazines. He claimed that an M4 can a “folding stock,” Instead, it has a Telescoping Stock, whose length can be adjusted by the user.

Tucker also suggested that the M4 is only used by tank crews and Bradley Fighting Vehicle teams, when in fact it’s the standard-issue rifle for all U.S. Army soldiers. Tucker also claimed that the grip of the M4 improves marksmanship. But his resume doesn’t include any marksmanship instructor certifications. He also filed a second court filing in which he disparaged Buford Boone’s testimony. Buford Boone was the FBI’s Ballistic Research Facility’s supervisory special agent for 15 years and is considered a top-notch expert in his field.

So I spoke with two Marine Corps veterans of many years. Of whose experience, I’m sure, one introduced me to another Marine, whose credentials were also unassailable. They are:

Chief Warrant Officer 5 Jeffrey L. Eby – 28 years in the Marines, 11 as a Marine Gunner. Combat veteran in Iraq. Officer in Charge of the USMC Small Arms Instructor Program, which created the USMC Combat Marksmanship Program.

Chief Warrant Officer 5 Mike Musselman – Infantryman for 25 years of his 30 years with the Corps. Marine Gunner, Infantry Weapons Officer. Three combat deployments in Iraq, one to Afghanistan.

Staff Sergeant Jack Leuba – Infantry Rifleman, Marksmanship and Small Arms Weapons Instructor, combat veteran in Iraq and Afghanistan, Staff Non-Commissioned Officer-in-Charge and Chief Instructor, USMC Small Arms Weapons Instructor School.

Below are the Marines’ responses. 

Rate of fire

For background, 1989 was the year that “assault weapon” California legislation was passed and Congress was established. The media tried to convince the American public that semi-automatic rifles are machine guns.

This video shows CBS broadcasting machine gun shots by government personnel in 1989. It was followed by NBC doing it again in 1993 before the Senate voted. “assault weapon” legislation was introduced by Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and again in 1994 before the House of Representatives voted.

After more than a decade-long complaints about the media’s machine guns lie, an anti gun activist group claimed in 2003 that semi-automatic firearms were actually legal. Continue reading It is more effective than automatic rifles for combat.

Tucker: “The only difference [between an AR-15 and a military M4] is the AR-15 cannot fire on full-auto,” “a picayune difference,” And “semiautomatic rifles [are] more lethal and most useful in combat settings.”

CWO5 Musselman: “The difference between semi-automatics and fully-automatics is significant and often decisive. The military is replacing the M16 and M4 with rifles of a newer design, and the newer rifles are capable of fully-automatic fire.”

Notice: California doesn’t consider AR-15s to be a weapon of choice for the military. “assault weapon.”

Tucker: “Changing [30-round] magazines during intense combat is the most important individual skill taught to Marines.”

Staff Sergeant Leuba: “False. The most important rifle skill taught to Marines is hitting the target. The USMC Combat Marksmanship Program allocates hundreds of hours of training specific to that, with barely a handful allocated to tasks such as reloading.”

Tucker: “[T]he pistol grip allows the rifleman to pull the rifle into her (sic) shoulder with each shot” And “functions as a hand rest to reduce hand/finger fatigue during long combat engagements.”

Staff Sgt. Leuba: “To the contrary, hooking the thumb of the firing hand over a traditional stock [see the photo below] provides for less fatigue when keeping the hand near the controls and trigger.”

Tucker: “Absent any pistol grip, a semi-automatic rifle would be difficult to operate when fired rapidly, as the rifle barrel would seesaw up and down with each shot fired in succession.”

CWO5 Musselman: “No. It’s a matter of physics. When the rifle is fired, it imparts upward movement of the barrel. It’s the forward hand, not the hand on the pistol grip, that controls that impulse.” This video illustrates Musselman’s point. 

Power of the Bullets

Tucker: “AR-15 and M4 … [ammunition] is capable of severing the upper body from the lower body, or decapitation.”

According to a 2008 NBC News report, it was not. “M855 rounds continue to be a weak spot in the American arsenal. They are not lethal enough to bring down an enemy decisively, and that puts troops at risk, according to Associated Press interviews. … Fired at short range, the M855 round is prone to pass through a body like a needle through fabric.”

Staff Sgt. Leuba: “Standard ballistics gelatin tests prove that 5.56x45mm NATO projectiles are not capable of ‘severing the upper body from the lower body, or decapitation.'”

CWO5 Musselman: “In my combat experience, I never saw a 5.56mm projectile cause the damage Col. Tucker claims.”

CWO5 Eby: “The Marine Corps abandoned the M16/M4 ammunition used in Afghanistan and Iraq, due in part to its failure to perform against enemy personnel in short-range combat engagements.”

Notice: The AR-15 cartridge is the most popular of the 13 centerfire rifle cartridges.

Bullets for 5.56 and.223 are small and lighter than a dime.

Tucker reiterated that AR-15s, magazines and some of the other features they include are not. “not needed” Self-defense. American gun owners seem to disagree, and gun owners opinion was a factor that the Supreme Court considered crucial in overturning Washington, D.C.’s handgun ban. Heller.

Something approaching 100 percent of Americans who attend defensive rifle classes or who participate in defensive-skills-based rifle marksmanship competitions do so with AR-15s or other semi-automatic rifles that use detachable ammunition magazines and that have “pistol grips.” Surveys consistently show that Americans purchase guns primarily to defend themselves. Data from the government shows that Americans are buying several million AR-15s annually, as well as other guns that California bans. “assault weapons.”

I will close with a last observation from Staff Sgt. Leuba:

Tucker’s most serious errors are his assertions that AR-15s or M4s are useless for individual self defense. I am a graduate from the USMC Close Quarters Battle Course and have extensive experience in military operations in urban terrain. The M4 (and therefore the AR-15) is a suitable firearm to use in compact spaces. It gives a defender—military or private citizen—a greater ability to end a threat at close-range, without endangering others in close proximity.