Heller Ruling Legal Impact - Individual Right

[dcal]

So what do you think the legal impact of Heller will be if found to be an individual right?

Personally, I think Heller gets his gun, but status quo otherwise, what do you think?

Don't forget to check out the Collective Right Poll.

 

[sacp81170a]

DC, NYC, NJ, CA, IL secede, the rest of the country breathes a sigh of relief and says, "Buh-bye!"

 

[Nobody's_Hero]

If the bradies saw this poll, they'd ask you to include "Wild-west shootouts and gun battles over traffic accidents" as a fifth option

Edit: It wouldn't be much of a war. Those states don't have many guns. But if they did secede, I'd leave them alone anyway. I don't think anyone would fight to bring them back, I'm just sayin'.

 

[green-grizzly]

If we win, the ruling will be very narrow. It will not apply the 2nd amendment to the states. It will not cover the bearing of arms, only the keeping of them. I bet it does not specifically define what arms are protected, but only states that at least some pistols are arms. The court may not even specifiy what standard of review is applicable.

If we are going to get a five or more votes, the opinion is going to emphasize the people's privacy interests in thier homes.

 

[ctdonath]

Whatever happens, a core principle must be enunciated. This will set the standard for all subsequent related laws & cases. If we get a predictable "individual right" result, individuals will use that as a tool to exercise RKBA without prohibition (there will be regulations and restrictions, but do the paperwork and it's yours to keep/carry). Sure, it will take time ... but it will happen, as individuals will have a powerful tool, and the collectivists will be going "but...but...scared...mommy...but...".

Chicago will be next in line, applying the 14th Amendment to make RKBA exist at all levels.
At the same time, a thousand NFA junkies (yours truly included) will be filing Form 4's for M4s, and taking 922(o) out: if DC's ban falls for predictable reasons, tossing 922(o) should be a cakewalk.

 

[stevelyn]

I say status quo. I don't have faith that the goobermint's black-robed rubber-stamp squad is going to rule in our favor.

 

[Rachen]

If NYC, whatever seceeds, that will be good for the country. No civil war.

Let them take care of their own affairs, soon, the libperverts will run their land so deep in muck that the citizens will finally turn off their TVs and start responding. Within a while, these states, under the leadership of new Conservatives, will be asking for permission to re-enter the Union.

 

[SWMAN]

With a ruling of an individual right, I don't see how the SCOTUS can rule any other way but strict scrutiny with regard to a governmental power trying to take away a fundamental right expressly stated in the BOR. For example, how could one say you cannot own a firearm if you don't have a history of criminal conviction or mental health issues? Because the government fears the weapons will be misused? And yet, some arms will be misused. There is nothing in life that is risk free. Freedom is never free. The 2A simply says that freedom of the society is the responsibility of individuals coming together with their arms unemcumbered by the government. All the government's role in the 2A is to facilitate the individuals' ability to more effectively fight with their individual weapons.