What this Supreme Court ruling "should" do is clarify the guidance to
the Appeals courts regarding the logic used to make decisions going
forward. The Appeals court, has been using a creative 2-part strategy
to nullify lower courts, Constitutional interpretation of the law. Now
The Appeals courts have been put on notice that:
A) The SC approves only the three-part logic that was applied in
"DC vs Heller".
and
B) The courts rulings must be consistent with the nation's historical
tradition of firearm regulation. The history of tradition of firearm
regulation, did not make a distinction between a hunting gun, and
a defensive gun, and a war gun. Has always presumed that the projectile
has to get to the chamber somehow. From powder, patch, and ball, to
cartridge's, to feeding device. This has always been part and parcel of
what was referred to as "Arms". Now, that historical context must be part
of new legislation, or risk being overturned at the SC level. This may not
stop Legislatures, and Governors from passing unconstitutional laws, but
sets them up to be struck down at the Appellate level. As the pendulum
swings back, the stage is set for the repeal of these unconstitutional laws.
