Opinions - which gun laws survive?

[Blackbeard]

We are pretty sure that any outright ban will fall, as Chicago's and Oak Park's are sure to. My question is, which other laws will fall and which will be upheld? My guesses are:

FOID cards and other owner registrys will survive. They don't infringe on the right to keep & bear, and you even have to register to vote. Fundamental rights are protected. I think training & testing requirements are likely to survive.

NFA will survive. 10% chance that the registry is reopened. AWBs may be dead. 10% chance to survive if they are challenged under the current (incl. Kagan) court.

Blanket carry bans (IL, WI) I think are doomed. I think states will have to allow either OC or CC -- won't be allowed to ban both. I think may-issue states will be forced into shall-issue.

Ammo bans -- hard to say. It'd be hard for a state to argue that hollowpoints are just for killing and therefore bannable when that was the central purpose of the 2A as cited in Heller. Magazine capacity bans -- 50/50 chance of surviving.

Anyway those are my guesses. What do you think?

 

[Bubba613]

Everything short of an outright ban and anything amounting to that will survive.

 

[wishin]

Reasonable restrictions will survive. The courts will see many a lawsuits on what constitutes "reasonable".

 

[INMY01TA]

Doesn't "substantive due process" mean equal protection under the law? I think Md's good and substantive reason for obtaining a ccw violates this.

 

[Buck Snort]

If this decision results in "May Issue" states being forced to become "Shall Issue" states I'll be tickled pink.

 

[danez71]

Wasnt this ruling particularly in reference to "in the home"? ie: not petainting (yet?) to OC or CC?

 

[Cards81fan]

It is important to keep in mind that Heller, while striking down a law that prohibited the possession of handguns in the home, recog-nized that the right to keep and bear arms is not “a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.”

I think that outright bans of handguns (and rifles and shotguns, if they ever exist) will be struck down.

Any laws regarding Open or Concealed Carry will be untouched, as this case was about protection in one's home. Any regulation related to other BATFE-regulated arms (automatic, SBR, Suppressor, etc..) will remain in place, as McDonald considered handguns as a preferred firearm for self-defense; any of the aforementioned would be hard to sell as common self-defense firearms.

 

[danez71]

Thanks Cardsfan.... that what I thought.

May issue.. shall issue... OC... CC..... those were not addressed at all.

This does open the doors for it but there are other challenges that will come long before those.

 

[Blackbeard]

Granted. I didn't mean that this particular ruling will force all states to become shall-issue. I meant that this ruling, which establishes self-defense as a fundamental right, and all the rulings that will logically follow. Picture 10 or 20 years from now, what does the gun law landscape look like?

 

[Lucky Derby]

I think the CA "approved handgun list", as well as anything similar, is history. There are many handguns "in common use" in the US that are not on the list. Also The current AWB in CA and anywhere else. Just show sales figures for AR and AK style weapons across the country and that should show that they are "in common use".
It opens the door to fight for an even playing field on either CCW or OC, or both.

 

[TexasBill]

Rather than focusing on what effect the decision will have on California, Illinois and New York, it might be more productive to focus on the 40-odd states that have some kind of carry law.

If you read it carefully, the decision goes beyond a handgun in the home. True, it does not permit anywhere, anytime carry, but it did mention that the justices considered reasonable limits on carrying to include sensitive buildings, schools, etc. To me, this means the majority of the Court expected there to be provisions for carrying handguns.

It's really a shame we got Due Process instead of Privileges and Immunities but that was probably too much to hope.

In any event, it's quite possible this ruling will encourage states to loosen what restrictions they have on law-abiding citizens RKBA.

 

[Igloodude]

A lot of lawyers are going to make a lot of money mapping out the line where reasonable restrictions meet the strict scrutiny due a fundamental right. How difficult will it be for a court to see the difference between "we don't want anyone to have guns, so we're going to make it as difficult as possible" and "we want everyone (who wants one) to possess guns in as safe a way as possible"?

 

[ilbob]

We are pretty sure that any outright ban will fall, as Chicago's and Oak Park's are sure to. My question is, which other laws will fall and which will be upheld? My guesses are:

FOID cards and other owner registrys will survive.
as long as the cost is kept to a bare minimum. places like NYC where the fees can easily exceed $1000 just to get any license at all will have some issues.

They don't infringe on the right to keep & bear, and you even have to register to vote. Fundamental rights are protected.

I think training & testing requirements are likely to survive.
do you need to be trained to check out a book at your public library? Or tested? There is no evidence at all that government mandated requirements along these lines have much benefit and especially if strict scrutiny is involved, they will go away.

NFA will survive.
probably.

10% chance that the registry is reopened.
not happening any time soon, if ever.

AWBs may be dead. 10% chance to survive if they are challenged under the current (incl. Kagan) court.
almost certainly AWBs go away. They are the most common rifles in the country.

Blanket carry bans (IL, WI) I think are doomed.
Unless we can get rid of the school zone and other nonsense laws, in most urban areas, it won't mean much.

I think states will have to allow either OC or CC -- won't be allowed to ban both.
I think there is a good chance the court eventually says OC is a right. It's not likely they will say you can chose between CC or OC. The specter of large number of people OCing may force improvement of CC laws. The phrase "bear arms" has enough of an OC connotation that I suspect that's where it will head.

I think may-issue states will be forced into shall-issue.
See comments above. I think they will be forced to accept OC.

Ammo bans -- hard to say. It'd be hard for a state to argue that hollowpoints are just for killing and therefore bannable when that was the central purpose of the 2A as cited in Heller. Magazine capacity bans -- 50/50 chance of surviving.
They go away. Strict scrutiny says so.

Anyway those are my guesses. What do you think?

I think a lot of lawyers will make a lot of money litigating this over the next couple of decades.

 

[JustinL]

It would be easier to ask which will fall as there will be few. Ultimately McDonald will only affect 5-6 states at the most: CA, NY, NJ, MA, IL.

Somebody mentioned the onerous fees involved in licensening

Another area would be laws forbiding 18-20 year olds from possessing / purchasing firearms.

Regardless it will be interesting to see how this plays out.

 

[TexasRifleman]

I think "May Issue" is dead effectively but that doesn't mean that shall issue will win. It may just as easily go to "no issue". No concealed carry at all would still meet "reasonable" for now.

By itself this case won't change much, neither did Heller. But they both open the door for a lot more now that it's completely settled that 2A is a fundamental right, and applies to the states.

That case may be in the works right now, in the form of the other Heller case. Now that Heller won he's still having problems in DC because of too many restrictions. His next case will ask "is this reasonable?" and we see what happens from there.

 

[geekWithA.45]

My predictions agree w/ DaveMarkowitz:

http://blogostuff.blogspot.com/2010/06/more-thoughts-on-mcdonald-v-chicago.html

Eventually Gone, after being litigated:

*outright bans incl. AWB, etc (by any mechanism, including excessive expense & paperwork)
*discretionary licensing schemes, notably "may issue" ccw
*prohibitive taxes & fees
*sporting purpose tests (because self defense is central to the right)
*Lautenberg (because it uniquely strips a fundamental right for misdemeanor offenses)
*Prohibition of CCW in places that aren't genuinely "sensitive" (genuinely sensitive: courts, federal bldgs, military bases, secure areas of airports. Dubious: churches, bars, hospitals, public gatherings, sports arenas, etc.)

Uncertain:

*Prohibitions for non violent offenders...there are exceptions in the 68 GCA that exempt certain classes of "white collar" crime that can be worked towards that end...


Probably Stays:

*NFA prohibitions on full auto & DD...Heller was specifically crafted for this
*"Shall issue"...but I think the terms of some states "may issue" procedures are going to have to change...training/testing requirements generally won't pass strict scrutiny, etc
*Prohibitions for violent felons/insane people
*All states will have to have some legal method of carry, either OC or CCW

* I'm also guessing that national reciprocity for carry licenses of some sort is on the table