You are very knowledgeable ,but you are about to be proven wrong.
Which you want to be.
Lacking the high-fallutin' education, I must disagree with the first part. I'd say I'm more analytical. Yes, I hope I am wrong, and I
WANT to be wrong, but my analysis of what I've seen come from the Court and of those
on the Court, I can't be optimistic.
Ergosphere
The bans are one thing, the confiscations are another. Those have occurred on the state level. Blood will flow if Congress decides to disarm us, be it our blood or the blood of the minions. Well, maybe I should speak only for my self. It'll either be my blood or the blood of the minions sent to disarm me. Regardless, disarmament will not be cost free at my house. That's the way it is in the free world. Live free or die. Thomas Payne's words and the words in the Constitution mean as much today as they did back then...To me, at least. I may end up as dead meat, but it'll be free dead meat.
I think it's much more likely that they'll rule as the article describes: uphold an individual right while eviscerating it on grounds of "reasonable restriction."
Eviscerate or infringe, it's six of one, half a dozen of the other.
Ah, well, California already has that restriction, as well as an AWB, magazine capacity limit, and handgun registration. And it's unlawful to carry a loaded firearm in most places. Then there's New Jersey, Illinois, New York, and Massachusetts, never mind the District of Columbia. We have a plethora of offensive firearm restrictions in this country: a hollow point ban, firearm ID cards, exams which must be passed in order to purchase a firearm, waiting periods, and restrictions on the frequency of purchases.
It has been small scale so far, and how many people - otherwise good, law abiding citizens - have kept their arms or bought new ones unbeknown to the state? I read somewhere that there were only about 250,000 registered guns in Massachusetts. Do you honestly think of the near 300,000,000 guns in this country that only less than one tenth of one percent are in in the hands of the citizens of Massachusetts?
What we don't have is a culture war. And if it didn't happen before, I doubt it will happen now in the event that the Circuit decision in Heller is overturned.
It does not solely depend upon the Court simply overturning
Parker/Heller, but upon what Congress and maybe some of the state legislatures decide to do after such a pile is dropped on our Right to Keep and Bear Arms and the now meaningless Second Amendment. You'll have to wait for the blood bath.
I think it's likely that we'll secure an individual right. But the interesting question is, what is protected by that right? Hope for the best, but be prepared for disappointment.
Nothing is protected by the right other than our freedom and security. That might require actually using arms. The protection discussed here comes from the Second Amendment. Our Right to keep and Bear Arms is not supposed to be infringed by government. Period. We can't use them for their intended purpose if we can't keep and bear them. I'm more than prepared for disappointment. I'm prepared for defense of my Right to Keep and Bear Arms.
geekWithA.45
AMEN.
Look at your rights and freedoms as what would be required to survive and be free as if there were no government. If that doesn't convince you to take a stand and protect your inalienable rights and freedoms, nothing will. If that doesn't convince you to maintain your personal sovereignty, you are already someone else's subject. If you don't secure your rights and freedoms to maintain your personal sovereignty now, it'll be too late to come to me for help when they come for you. I will already be dead because I had to stand alone. B.E.Wood
Woody