07-10-2018, 01:34 PM
His main point was simply to extend the 2008 test logically (not to invent or to introduce a new standard, however accurate or better it may have been) to a set of arms (semi-auto rifles) not specifically mentioned in the 2008 decision but stating there was no real difference constitutionally between the semi-auto handgun and semi-auto rifle; hence the legality as defined by the SC in the 2008 decision should extend to the case before them on semi-auto rifles.
"Down the floor, out the door, Go Brandon Go!!!!!"