coloradokevin
Member
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2008
- Messages
- 3,285
Okay, hear me out here for a minute... I know we are all tired of this case by now, but I'm starting to think towards the next battles to be fought in this area of law!
I just read the entire majority opinion from the SCOTUS' decision on DC v Heller. This isn't exactly light reading material, and my mind is still foggy from the first 64 pages!!!
While I was encouraged by much of what the justices said, I was bothered by a few things...
Please reference pages 52 and 55 of the Supreme Court opinion, as I can't figure out how to cut/paste from a PDF file.
Page 52 essentially states, in part, that the NFA machine gun ban is not going to be overthrown by this decision (okay, never expected that anyway). This portion of the decision explains their interpretation of the Miller case, and mentions arms "in common use at the time" in the context of what the 2A intends to protect.
Page 55 concerns me more, as it mentions how it is lawful to prohibit the carrying of "dangerous and unusual weapons". The M-16 is actually mentioned near the end of this page, in a somewhat tangentially related context.
So, for those of you who have taken the time to read the decision, do you think that it is plausible that we'll be facing yet another "evil black rifle" ban in the not-too-distant future?
Lets face it, "commonly used" arms leaves a lot of room for interpretation, and I'm not so sure that Heller has insulated us to some of these unreasonable gun restrictions! Just thought I'd get some thoughts about the strength (or lack thereof) of the Heller decision!
I just read the entire majority opinion from the SCOTUS' decision on DC v Heller. This isn't exactly light reading material, and my mind is still foggy from the first 64 pages!!!
While I was encouraged by much of what the justices said, I was bothered by a few things...
Please reference pages 52 and 55 of the Supreme Court opinion, as I can't figure out how to cut/paste from a PDF file.
Page 52 essentially states, in part, that the NFA machine gun ban is not going to be overthrown by this decision (okay, never expected that anyway). This portion of the decision explains their interpretation of the Miller case, and mentions arms "in common use at the time" in the context of what the 2A intends to protect.
Page 55 concerns me more, as it mentions how it is lawful to prohibit the carrying of "dangerous and unusual weapons". The M-16 is actually mentioned near the end of this page, in a somewhat tangentially related context.
So, for those of you who have taken the time to read the decision, do you think that it is plausible that we'll be facing yet another "evil black rifle" ban in the not-too-distant future?
Lets face it, "commonly used" arms leaves a lot of room for interpretation, and I'm not so sure that Heller has insulated us to some of these unreasonable gun restrictions! Just thought I'd get some thoughts about the strength (or lack thereof) of the Heller decision!