While I understand that the Judge's decision references the power of the state to regulate "commercial sale of arms" as set out in Heller. I do wonder the logic of how that interest - in this case - out weighs the constitutional protections for individuals. To me this decision is odd and unexpected. It's also possible that this decision will spawn new regulatory ideas from the Brady ilk.
Last edited by JoshM75; October 2, 2011 at 10:52 PM.