来源：《华盛顿邮报》
原文刊登日期：2021年6月8日
A federal judge’s decision overturning California’s longtime ban on assault weapons has been rightly mocked for its ridiculous likening of an AR-15 rifle to a Swiss Army knife. But the ruling is no laughing matter. While it will be appealed — and hopefully overturned by judges who understand the Second Amendment is not without limits — the ruling is part of a sustained attack on gun safety laws that has been emboldened by the shift in balance of the U.S. Supreme Court.
一名联邦法官推翻了加州长期以来对攻击性武器的禁令，这一决定理所当然地受到了嘲笑，因为它荒谬地把AR-15步枪比作瑞士军刀。但这项裁决可不是闹笑话。虽然它将被上诉，并有望被理解第二修正案并非没有限制的法官推翻，但这一裁决是对枪支安全法律的持续攻击的一部分，这种攻击由于美国最高法院平衡的转变（现在最高法院右派大法官多于左派大法官）而变得更加大胆。
U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez of the Southern District of California on Friday termed the state’s ban on assault weapons, implemented in 1989 and revised over the years, “a failed experiment” and ruled it unconstitutional. “Like the Swiss Army Knife, the popular AR-15 rifle is a perfect combination of home defense weapon and homeland defense equipment,” began the 94-page ruling that dripped with disdain for California’s efforts to confront gun violence and showed no concern for its victims. “No amount of gun control laws will prevent criminals from misusing guns,” he wrote.
加州南区联邦地方法官罗杰·贝尼特斯周五称，加州对攻击性武器的禁令是一项“失败的实验”，并裁定该禁令违宪。该禁令于1989年实施，多年来经过多次修订。“像瑞士军刀一样，广受欢迎的AR-15步枪是家庭防御武器和国土防御设备的完美结合，”这份长达94页的裁决这样开篇，并对加州在打击枪支暴力方面所做的努力充满了轻蔑，对受害者也没有表现出任何关心。“再多的枪支管制法律也无法阻止罪犯滥用枪支，”他写道。
The ruling runs counter to repeated decisions over the years in both state and federal courts upholding prohibitions against assault weapons on the grounds of the state’s compelling interest in protecting public safety. Among the states where bans of these weapons of war were ruled constitutional are Massachusetts, New York and Maryland. California’s own law was previously upheld by a federal-district court of California and multiple state appellate courts. But those familiar with Judge Benitez, appointed to the federal bench by President George W. Bush, were not surprised by his ruling. He previously struck down a law passed by the state’s voters that would have banned possession of magazines holding more than 10 bullets. His court, the New York Times reported, has become a welcoming place for gun rights advocates because of a rule that allows “related cases” to be directed to one judge rather than randomly assigned.
这项裁决违背了多年来各州和联邦法院反复作出的决定，这些决定都是以州政府保护公共安全的重大利益为理由，支持禁止攻击性武器。这些禁止战争武器的州包括马萨诸塞州、纽约州和马里兰州。加州自己的法律之前得到了加州联邦地方法院和多个加州上诉法院的支持。但熟悉贝尼特斯法官的人对他的裁决并不感到意外。贝尼特斯是由美国前总统乔治·w·布什任命的联邦法官。此前，他推翻了一项由加州选民通过的法律，该法律禁止持有容量10发子弹以上的弹夹。据《纽约时报》报道，根据规定，允许“相关案件”由同一名法官审理，而不是随机分配，他所在的法院已成为枪支权利倡导者的欢迎之地。
When the Supreme Court ruled in 2008 that the Second Amendment establishes an individual right to keep guns in the home for self-defense, it also made clear that the right is not absolute but is subject to government regulation. Assault weapons, more dangerous than other firearms, are disproportionately used in crimes and against law enforcement. They — not Swiss Army knives — are the weapon of choice of mass shooters because of their efficiency in killing as many people as possible in the shortest amount of time. If they can’t be banned, it is hard to see what reasonable gun regulations the government could impose to try to save lives.
2008年，最高法院裁定，《第二修正案》确立了个人在家中保存枪支用于自卫的权利，但也明确指出，这种权利不是绝对的，而是受政府监管的。攻击性武器比其他枪支更危险，被不成比例地用于犯罪和危害执法。它们——不是瑞士军刀——而是枪手选择的大规模杀伤性武器，因为它们能在最短的时间内杀死尽可能多的人。如果不能禁止这类枪支，就很难看到有什么合理的枪支管理条例可以用来挽救生命。