View Single Post
Old March 17, 2009, 07:33 PM   #7
Tennessee Gentleman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,611
The main thing Heller did IMO was to kill the "collective right" fantasy of the antigun coalition. Winkler makes a good point in that Scalia's view is modern in it's reasoning.

The antis argued that the RKBA was tied to service in the militia. Since the militia is long since dead, the antis reasoned that this would give the government the right to restrict guns in any way they choose to. Since their was no individual RKBA then unless one could show a "militia" purpose then the issue was moot and since the militia was dead it would always be so.

Scalia changed that and decoupled the prefactory clause form the operative and made the modern call that individual citizens have a RKBA for personal protection unrelated to service in the militia.

Now, any proposed gun control legislation like the AWB must now submit to scrutiny concerning that individual right. Before, it could be dismissed by simply saying "no relation to service in the militia". That is huge.

Will it change much? In some cases I think not. No machineguns and grenade launchers for the masses or no gun free zones but no outright bans either. The antis will still try other means but they can no longer say "Well, you get your guns when the militia is formed up". Scalia got rid of that rubric and I am glad he did.
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted."
Anonymous Soldier.
Tennessee Gentleman is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.04690 seconds with 7 queries