Let's start.
From Harvard Law and Policy Review:
To the question “what is protected under the Second Amendment?”, Heller answers: those firearms in “common use for lawful purposes like self-defense.”[3] “Common use” suggests two possibilities.One is a narrow, numerical standard that would protect best-selling models from popular manufacturers but allow prohibitions on obscure brands of essentially the same gun. The other view is that “common use” means functionally common. This view would protect the entire class of similarly functioning guns regardless of whether millions were sold by popular makers.
Functional commonality is the better and really the only defensible view for two reasons. First, the cribbed numerical approach produces the same kind of equal protection problem that prompted challenges and then amendments to California’s assault weapons ban.[4] It is difficult to justify drastically different treatment of owners and manufacturers of functionally identical guns.
The second objection is that the common use standard derives from the eighteenth-century understanding that citizens were expected to answer the militia call with arms “provided by themselves in common use at the time for lawful purposes like self defense.”[5] Gun manufacturing at the time was pre-assembly line. Most private firearms were functionally similar, but every gun was essentially custom-made.[6] So, the common use standard was not and is not source specific.
So... with Heller language, AWB are certainly "in common use" and with the current makeup of SCOTUS, an AWB would be found unconstitutional.
Speaking of unconstitutional, did you read this?
https://www.npr.org/2020/08/14/902676422/federal-appeals-court-throws-out-california-ban-on-large-capacity-gun-magazines
In a blow to gun control activists, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on Friday that California's ban on large-capacity ammunition magazines is unconstitutional, violating the Second Amendment.
In a 2-1 decision, the panel of judges found that such firearm magazines are protected arms under the Second Amendment and are not "unusual arms" that would fall outside its scope.
This is all really basic stuff... I'm not using obscure readings of the law to justify myself.
= new reply since forum marked as read
