It's About Time

Supreme Court Strikes Down D.C. Gun Ban, Upholds Individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms

"Writing for the majority, Justice Antonin Scalia said that an individual right to bear arms is supported by "the historical narrative" both before and after the Second Amendment was adopted."

Some are saying that one of the unanswered questions is whether this ruling incorporates the 2nd Amenedment against the states. Some claim it did not, but other analysis indicates it rather clearly does. My reading leans toward the later.

The question now is what effect this will have on now unconstitutional gun control rules and regulations in various cities and states, and when. Here are the Massachusetts laws that I think could and should be affected and invalidated by this ruling:

1. Assault Weapon Ban (C.140: S. 131M):
   
2. "Consumer Protection"-based Handgun Ban (C.140: S. 123)
3. Discretionary and Restrictive Licensing (C.140: S. 131)
4. Mandatory Locks for Sales (C.140: S. 123)
5. Mandatory Storage (C.140: S. 131L)
6. Transportation Restrictions (C.269: S. 12D, C.140: S. 131C (a), (b), C.140: S. 121, C.269: S. 10 (m), , C. 140: S. 131C)*

Bottom line is that this ruling should lead to nationwide "shall-issue" or "no license required" policies, the abolishment of locked storage and transportation laws, and repeal of all AWBs and other bans of specific types of non-NFA firearms. We shall see if and how long this takes. I suspect some places, like Massachusetts, will take further legal action to bring this ruling into force.

The last question is "How could 4 justices dissent?!?" Clearly gun control is a matter of ideology bordering on religion for them, not law. Sad.

Go to SCOTUSBlog for more discussion and analysis.

*MGL references from www.goal.org