TexasCHLforum.com

The Supreme Court has never (to my knowledge) stated clearly that the RKBA is an individual right, like freedom of speech or the right to vote. When they have overturned "gun control" laws, it was on some technical basis like overextending the commerce clause.

I think it would be a big gain to have them say it once and for all.

Chicago has laws similar to D.C., complete prohibition of handguns acquired after some date in the 1970s.

In many localities, residents need the permission of the police chief or sheriff to buy a handgun, and they can be denied for any or no reason.

Depending upon the wording of the final ruling, those restrictions could also be ended.

Knowing what I do about the Supreme Court, though, I would expect them to uphold Parker on the narrowest grounds possible.

- Jim

KBCraig wrote:The "wrong" ruling wouldn't change a thing.

I think it would depend upon how the SCOTUS reversed the D.C. District Court ruling. If they reversed it on some technical grounds, calling for a rehearing, that wouldn't be so bad.

OTOH, the Parker ruling states explicitly that the RKBA is an individual right. If the SCOTUS said that was incorrect, I think it would be a disaster. (They're not likely to do that, but still...)

- Jim

The danger of the Parker case is that the Supreme Court could uphold D.C.'s position. That would be a disaster, opening the way for any jurisdiction to ban any type of weapon. It is nearly impossible to overcome a Supreme Court decision except by a Constitutional amendment, which is not going to happen in the foreseeable future.

The D.C. Personal Protection Act has a good chance of passing; and if it doesn't pass this year, it can be tried again. In other words, it carries little risk.

I think reasonable people can disagree about things like this without assuming some kind of malice or secret agenda.

- Jim