01-01-2013, 04:28 AM
I'm not sure Feinstein's bill as currently envisioned by her ladyship would pass SCOTUS muster, at least with current membership.
From Heller:
f) None of the Courts precedents forecloses the Courts interpretation. Neither United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542, 553, nor Presser v. Illinois, 116 U. S. 252, 264265, refutes the individual- rights interpretation. United States v. Miller, 307 U. S. 174, does not limit the right to keep and bear arms to militia purposes, but rather limits the type of weapon to which the right applies to those used by the militia, i.e., those in common use for lawful purposes. Pp. 4754.
But I can see potential registration and NFA status being imposed and upheld by SCOTUS. (Heller passed upon entertaining licensing requirement since Heller did not object, as long as it wasn't arbitrary). Most likely a high capacity magazine ban.
From Heller:
f) None of the Courts precedents forecloses the Courts interpretation. Neither United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542, 553, nor Presser v. Illinois, 116 U. S. 252, 264265, refutes the individual- rights interpretation. United States v. Miller, 307 U. S. 174, does not limit the right to keep and bear arms to militia purposes, but rather limits the type of weapon to which the right applies to those used by the militia, i.e., those in common use for lawful purposes. Pp. 4754.
But I can see potential registration and NFA status being imposed and upheld by SCOTUS. (Heller passed upon entertaining licensing requirement since Heller did not object, as long as it wasn't arbitrary). Most likely a high capacity magazine ban.
LIFE member: NRA, TSRA, SAF, GOA
Defend the Constitution and our 2A Rights!
Defend the Constitution and our 2A Rights!