Interesting legal analysis: 2nd Amendment after Heller/McDonald
 

This monograph:

http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/cg...text=lawreview

Has an interesting discussion of the right to bear arms after the Heller (Wash DC) and McDonald (Chicago) decisions.

It points out the strategies that might be used to chip away at things, ultimately leading to more decision making at the supreme court level.

It's a reminder of how important 2nd Amendment respecting justices (at all levels) will be important to us in the near future.

Marc

I read the first few sections, and the writer seems to be taking a neutral, well thought-out position. His position relies on fact, and not hysterical emotion that drives legislation in Progressive states.

I wish I could link to the latest revision of California's SB 249 legislation. If passed in this version it seems (from posters on calguns.net) that it seems to have wording that would lead to banning of all firearms in Cali, no Grandfathered items or compensation for loss of previously owned items. The discussion there seems quite dismal considering the political majority there.

If certain types of arms (Mag fed, semiauto) are outlawed, what type of exemption will Lugers enjoy?

If certain types of arms (Mag fed, semiauto) are outlawed..there will be war.

Joe,

I think that this is California's listing for the SB-249 legislation:

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/po...b_249&sess=CUR

with the most recent version PDF: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/...ed_asm_v93.pdf

It certainly seems one of the "Cosmetic Feature" based attempts to limit 2nd amendment rights that the law review article was discussing.

We'll likely see more of this activity, which will eventually bubble up to Supreme Court evaluation.

Marc

I was thinking about this today at the gym. I live in AZ, and am not affected by it. My question to anyone who knows the answer to is this; here in AZ the State just approved a bill titled SB 1070 that gave LEOS more direction when encountering Illegal Immigrants in the course of their duties. Since the majority of the Illegals here are Mexican, this is somehow seen as discrimination and the Feds sue the state to overturn this, stating that Immigration is a Federal issue.

How is it then, that The State of California can create laws (for decades before SB 249) that differ from the Federal statutes regarding 2nd Amendment issues and not be sued in a similar manner by the Feds? The ATF controls NFA items and it also sets the standards for what configurations of arms are NOT legal for citizens to own without their approval. Cali seems to be over-ruling the Feds here.

It would seem that the feds pick the battles they want to fight.

Probably more Hispanic voters nation wide than gun owners in California.