Quote:
|
The argument the state would use, and probably the 9th circuit would agree, is that "assault weapons" are "dangerous or unusual" and therefore it is consitutional to severely restrict or ban them.
|
Quote:
"It may be objected that if weapons that are most useful in military service—M16 rifles and the like—may be banned, then the Second Amendment right is completely detached from the prefatory clause. But as we have said, the conception of the militia at the time of the Second Amendment’s ratification was the body of all citizens capable of military service, who would bring the sorts of lawful weapons that they possessed at home."
Majority decision, page 55.
|
Heller does address the idea of an "Assault Weapons" ban, and a decently-argued case could be a winner. All we need is for someone in California to request registration on a non-listed rifle, then sue when the registration is denied.
Good thing the Justice writing it was a machine gun collector 8-)