Everyone seems to have a different take on this matter. I know we all speak of the Second Ammendment and the like, but what is the reality?
Reality is ultimately what the people believe it is.
If the people believe in the legal validity of a ban, then they can be banned.
If they believe it violates an absolute, then they have no legal validity.
Based on the opinions of those choosing to speak here, the legal validity of a ban exists because while nobody here would agree with one, most seem to believe it can be done. That makes it legaly valid if you assume this is a sample of the least likely to support such legislation.
So such a ban can still be politicly defeated, but they can be banned.
What is legal is what people think is legal.
Not what they want, but what they believe has legitimate legal basis that does not conflict with previous legal precedent.
That is why interpretations of previous decisions matter so much. Lawyers interprete things differently, and some build arguments in favor of one line of logic based on past court decisions, Constitutional rights etc
Others create different interpretations and arguments using logic built from other perspectives based on precedent, and the different sides 'prove' which one has validity in court.
The new logic proven in court, then has new groups of lawyers attempt to stretch it further with all different interpretations, building new logic to encompass more within the court's previous decision, until some sort of counter logic limits the scope of the decision.
That is a serious simplification, but in the end that is what it boils down to.
What people believe can be done, is what can be done.
What the people that work in law believe is what the LEO come to understand as law and enforce.
In the end it really is all just opinions.
They weren't banned - they were reclassified by the Sec. of the Treasury.....
You have been blinded. Almost no country on Earth has banned firearms. They have just reclassified them. Some places only police can usualy qualify for certain classifications, in others some classes can be purchased with differing levels of scrutiny.
That is how guns are banned in the world at large. Every society and government has a need for firearms held by at least some people, so they are not really "banned" just heavily restricted.
So a gun "ban" will almost always be just a reclassification, not a "ban".
Even though Australia banned most types of firearms, they are just technicaly reclassified, and everything including machineguns just requires a certain category license.
So by your interpretation, they never really banned anything.
So if you are looking for the "ban" you will never see it when it happens.