Estimated reading time: 0 minutes
William Kirk of Washington Gun Law recently broke down a troubling development in Colorado’s ongoing litigation over municipal “assault weapon” and magazine bans.
In Rocky Mountain Gun Owners v. Town of Superior, the defendants have filed a renewed motion for summary judgment, essentially asking the court to toss out the lawsuit without even moving forward to discovery or trial.
But as Kirk explains, the most alarming part isn’t the procedural move itself—it’s the dangerous legal reasoning behind it.
According to Kirk, the government is attempting to reframe the Second Amendment standard in a way that could make it nearly impossible to ever challenge a ban.
Instead of acknowledging that firearms are protected if they are “in common use for lawful purposes,” the defendants argue they must be in common use specifically for self-defense. That distinction may sound minor, but as Kirk points out, it creates an evidentiary impossibility.
Plaintiffs would never be able to prove such a narrow definition, allowing courts to sidestep the Second Amendment entirely.
On top of that, the defendants argue that they don’t need to show a direct historical precedent for their bans, only a vague “historical principle” that can be loosely tied to modern restrictions.
Kirk describes this as a dangerous cocktail: narrowing “common use” to self-defense while at the same time broadening historical analogies to almost anything.
If courts adopt this formula, any ban could be justified with the thinnest historical reference, no matter how far removed from the founding era.
SEE ALSO: MIL/LEO Only Guns From Your Favorite Companies
Kirk notes that this isn’t just sloppy lawyering—it’s a deliberate effort to rewrite the rule of law in real time.
By reframing both the applicability of the Second Amendment and the historical tradition test, governments can build legal escape hatches that allow restrictions to stand regardless of precedent.
He likens it to the broader trend of civilian disarmament advocates reframing not only the debate, but the very rules of the debate, until the outcome is predetermined.
This, Kirk warns, is why groups like RMGO and the National Association for Gun Rights are fighting these cases so hard.
If courts accept the government’s arguments here, it won’t just affect Colorado. It will set a precedent that undermines Second Amendment challenges everywhere, making it almost impossible to win in court.
For Kirk, the takeaway is clear: gun owners need to pay close attention to the legal arguments being advanced, not just the outcomes. Because if courts start accepting this reframing, the right to keep and bear arms could be hollowed out one ruling at a time.
***Buy and Sell on GunsAmerica!***
Available on GunsAmerica Now
is a seasoned outdoorsman, lifelong hunter, and the kind of guy who’d rather track whitetails than scroll social media. As an editor for GunsAmerica, he’s got a sharp eye for spotting both solid gear and bad gun laws. Whether he’s deep in the woods or deep in editorial deadlines, Larry brings a no-nonsense, tell-it-like-it-is approach to firearms, hunting, and the great American tradition of self-reliance. If there’s a hot debate on gun rights or the latest in hunting tech, you can bet Larry’s got an opinion—and it’s probably backed up with both facts and field experience.
Experience:
– Licensed Bowhunter, Hunter, and Trapper – Experienced in ethical hunting and wildlife conservation.
– Concealed Carry Permit Holder (NYS & AZ) – Trained and licensed to carry in multiple states.
– 2A Journalist – Covering firearms legislation, Second Amendment issues, and gun rights for over a decade.
– Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) – Certified to provide emergency medical care in the field.
– Field-Tested Gear Reviewer – Hands-on experience with firearms, optics, and hunting tech.
Worse, if this is successful against the Second Amendment, then the same argument WILL BE USED AGAINST THE REST of the Amendments until the entire Constitution will be obliterated and a new one written to serve the interests of the Democrat party.
Just more weasel wording from lawyers attempting to circumvent the law. That is, after all, just what they do for a living.
guess we need to get out and self defense more……i would suggest msr’s and sbr’s with “banana clips” and glocks with extended mags be used!