Justin Buist

My thoughts pretty much resemble what GeekWithA45 said early today on the topic.

I’m pretty relaxed about the whole thing. We should get a ruling that declares the right to keep and bear arms an individual right. That’s good enough for me. That would remove the whole argument that one needs to be in a government controlled militia to own firearms.

Now, as to the question of whether or not an outright ban on certain arms qualifies as an infringement, that’s a whole new ball game.

They may come back and just say that the DC law on handgun ownership and functional long arms isn’t constitutional. Or they might refer back to the Miller case and get a little more expansive and reassert that there’s an individual right to keep arms that are suitable only for militia purposes. Or they might take the view of the DOJ brief filed and say that while it’s an individual right the government is still free to ban anything they want to.

The latter opinion, obviously, confuses the hell out of me, but the DOJ made a case for it.

If Heller results in a pro-individual rights ruling we’re probably going to see a number legal battles related to the 2nd amendment in short order. I read that Bob Levy wants to after the 1911 NYC Sullivan Act next. That’d be a good way to take on the incorporation issue that isn’t going to be addressed in this case.

If Heller results in a collective rights ruling there won’t be a legal battle on the issue ever again.