RealGun
Member
For DC to lose an appeal means the precedent goes nationwide instantly - and a lot of people will act on that. -ctdonath
I don't believe I am actually disagreeing, but the Court has not ruled that the 2A applies to the States via the 14A. DC is within federal jurisdiction. I figure the ruling is confined to the scope of DC, the Court speaks only for the federal government, and States can ignore it until challenged on 14A grounds. I'll take it as welcome precedent but wonder if some are getting a little too excited about the implications of this case.
What is so interesting re DC is that until FFLs are issued in DC, there will still be no way to be a legal gun owner in DC, even if this ruling stands and takes effect. To have legislated that one cannot buy a handgun outside a State of residence is a 2A infringement, and quite effective when coupled with a refusal to allow gun dealers in a "State". So what we have to watch for is DC fighting to prevent the introduction of gun dealers in DC. I believe they still have a line of defense for banning or prosecuting gun possession in DC.
Anybody want to underwrite the burglary insurance policy for a gun store in DC? Think about it. This is going to take awhile. The perfect place to allow purchase of firearms from another State is DC. It is not a State, it is subject to the Second Amendment, and the feds can regulate interstate commerce.
I don't believe DC can require a license for CCW because it would be a 2A infringement, if issuing the license has conditions for denial from a sane, free man. You won't find that condition in any real State until the 2A is applied to States via the 14A.