If SCOTUS rules positively in NYSRPA Inc. v. Bruen how far away are we from Constitutional Carry?

[AlexanderA]

The main gun qualifies as a DD, if with working breech (rifled > 1/2" bore; you might have an argument about a smooth bore, but they'd apply the "no sporting purpose" language).

The point I was trying to make is that the Destructive Device registry is open, meaning you can get a tank with a (new) main gun, if you go through the NFA formalities. The Machine Gun registry is closed. If you want to put the secondary armament on your tank, you have to use overpriced pre-1986 machine guns. (By the way, each round for the main gun is a Destructive Device in itself. If you want to pursue this hobby, you better have a strong bank account.)

 

[jdc1244]

And that is a STATE RIGHT and it is how it was intended by the founding fathers.

A states’ rights purist/absolutist could advance the opinion that the states likewise have the right to regulate firearms as they see fit, as was intended by the Framers.

 

[AlexanderA]

A states’ rights purist/absolutist could advance the opinion that the states likewise have the right to regulate firearms as they see fit, as was intended by the Framers.

McDonald v. Chicago held that the 2nd Amendment applied to the states, under the Due Process clause of the 14th Amendment. Therefore any 2A interpretations by the Supreme Court apply to the states as well. This is why a decision in the NY carry case would have nationwide effect.

 

[starnbar]

Do not forget the right to keep and bear arms is a right enumerated in the Bill Of Rights abortion is not and as KBA applies to all states there shall be no law which infringes on that right.

 

[Spats McGee]

I've done a little thread cleanup, and I'll offer this little tidbit: If this thread starts heading down the road towards an abortion discussion, it will be closed.

I think I was clear.