Sorry for making another thread about heller but i guess it is to be expected today.
I have some doubts about the practical outcomes of this decision. Sure headlines such as "DC Gun Ban Struck Down" and "Right to Bear Arms=Individual Right" may sound good to your ears but after reading Scalia's opinion I'm not so sure its a big win.
What it does: prevent a Californian/city outright ban on firearms. Good, but I don't think we were going there for a while anyway.
What it doesnt do: 1. Establish a test for gun laws. The court did not implement a test or level of scrutiny to distinguish which laws infringe on our constitutional rights and which ones do not. This will open to floodgates to a huge amount of lawsuits which 95+% of will not make it past the state level.
2. Ban registration/licenses. Upholding the right of a state to issue licenses is a major problem because they can in effect still take a non-issue stance such as California does towards its CCW policy. The states are told not to do so but it will take many more cases before these de facto gun bans go away.
3. Decide whether gun laws are up to the States or Feds. No clarification here means states are able to implement stupid laws. (CA AWB anyone?)
4. Strike down other restrictions on firearms such as stupid school zone laws. Also said that these regulations were OK.
IMO this case will not effect our daily lives for at least a long time, if ever.
Feel free to disagree. I want to hear what other people think.
Mike Baryla
International Relations Major @ USD
AFROTC
I have some doubts about the practical outcomes of this decision. Sure headlines such as "DC Gun Ban Struck Down" and "Right to Bear Arms=Individual Right" may sound good to your ears but after reading Scalia's opinion I'm not so sure its a big win.
What it does: prevent a Californian/city outright ban on firearms. Good, but I don't think we were going there for a while anyway.
What it doesnt do: 1. Establish a test for gun laws. The court did not implement a test or level of scrutiny to distinguish which laws infringe on our constitutional rights and which ones do not. This will open to floodgates to a huge amount of lawsuits which 95+% of will not make it past the state level.
2. Ban registration/licenses. Upholding the right of a state to issue licenses is a major problem because they can in effect still take a non-issue stance such as California does towards its CCW policy. The states are told not to do so but it will take many more cases before these de facto gun bans go away.
3. Decide whether gun laws are up to the States or Feds. No clarification here means states are able to implement stupid laws. (CA AWB anyone?)
4. Strike down other restrictions on firearms such as stupid school zone laws. Also said that these regulations were OK.
IMO this case will not effect our daily lives for at least a long time, if ever.
Feel free to disagree. I want to hear what other people think.
Mike Baryla
International Relations Major @ USD
AFROTC





--random
Comment