Yesterday’s SCOTUS review of the Washington DC gun ban was interesting – even to those of us who thought we knew what to expect.
First, DCs attorney opened with statements of historical falsity. Either he is stupid, unprepared, or willing to lie even to the Supreme Court to get his way. (See 3:16-25).
Secondly, during discussion, even Justice Kennedy (hardly a conservative) was opining on the unequivocal right of the individual to own arms. The court’s sticking point was whether a jurisdiction could legitimately ban one type of firearm while allowing others.
Thirdly, the court argument veered into the territory of allowing machine guns due to their applicability to military service (we feel it is highly unlikely that the court will ever rule that machine guns are legitimate for civilian possession – even though the M-16 is the basic arm of our military).
Prediction – the court will rule that the fundamental right of individuals to own and bear arms is protected, that “bear arms” requires further review to determine cases and circumstances where the right cannot be regulated, and that ownership of various types of firearms can be subjected to reasonable regulation that is more lenient than most attempts now. The DC ban will be struck down. Licensing will be upheld. Many challenges to regulations and licensing will follow.
Ah, well – you can’t have everything. Where would you put it?