manta49, we have recent Supreme Court decisions that indicate the Second Amendment applies to individuals, and that weapons in common use are protected; previously, the Court had ruled that weapons suited for militia use were protected.
So, we now have a broad spectrum of weapons that are considered protected, and the antis have lost the argument about the Second Amendment being for the purpose of equipping state militias, only.
That changes the dynamic. Laws that might be passed have a serious Achilles heel that they did not previously have. Also, having seen what happened in 1994, gun owners have a better grass-roots organization and focus, now.
So, could laws be passed? Yes, of course, but they might not stand up to Constitutional challenges. Meanwhile, millions of gun owners are actively working to prevent passage of those laws in the first place.
Last edited by MLeake; February 3, 2013 at 09:24 PM.
Reason: "antis" not "states"