In celebration of my God given right to keep and bear arms, I went out Thursday and fired all my guns and enjoyed it even more than usual.
Laws impinging on the Second Amendment can receive no lower level of review than any other “specific enumerated right” such as free speech, the guarantee against double jeopardy or the right to counsel (or the right to keep and bear arms. See United States v. Carolene Products Co., 304 U. S. 144, 152, n. 4 ( 1938 )
The majority opinion ties the Second Amendment to the same standards and precedents as freedom of speech, the guarantee against double jeopardy, and the right to counsel and in no small terms opens the door to more litigation against those cities that have enacted bullshit laws restricting gun ownership.
I believe there is one already filed in that loser town of Chicago. May Mayor Daly lose his liberal mind to the onslaught.
This is probably one of the paragraphs that will go against the Nazi regime of Kalifornistan.
It may be objected that if weapons that are most useful in military service—M-16 rifles and the like—may be banned, then the Second Amendment right is completely detached from the prefatory clause. But as we have said, the conception of the militia at the time of the Second Amendment’s ratification was the body of all citizens capable of military service, who would bring the sorts of lawful weapons that they possessed at home to militia duty. It may well be true today that a militia, to be as effective as militias in the 18th century, would require sophisticated arms that are highly unusual in society at large. Indeed, it may be true that no amount of small arms could be useful against modern-day bombers and tanks. But the fact that modern developments have limited the degree of fit between the prefatory clause and the protected right cannot change our interpretation of the right.
Here are a few blogs that talk about it:
Of Arms and the Law is all about this topic.
SCOTUS Blog has a much more detailed analysis.
