Quote:
|
1. AWBs on magazine size, cosmetic features...constitutional
|
Possibly, it depends on the specifics of the ban. Remember, not all AWB's are uniform and some are more draconian than others. If we're talking about something like the '94 Federal Ban then I would probably agree that, as much as I wouldn't like it, it would probably pass constitutional muster at least with the current court although I could see magazine capacity restrictions possibly being a sticking point. However, were there a ban on, say, all firearms with detatchable magazines or all semi-automatic firearms then I don't think it could get by SCOTUS.
Quote:
|
2. Limitations on open and concealed carry...constitutional.
|
Again it depends on the limitations. A shall-issue licensing system for open, concealed, or both would, I have no doubt, pass constitutional muster. However, I don't think that a no-issue or may-issue system for both types would stand.
Quote:
|
3. Registration: constitutional
|
So long as it's a "shall-register" system for lack of a better term then yes. This one has really already been decided. Both Chicago and D.C. had registration procedures already in place, they just refused to register anything. So long as the registering organization is legally bound to register a gun to anyone who meets the legal requirements and pays any associated fees then I believe registration would probably be found constitutional by the current court.
As always, the devil is in the details. An overly onerous or prohibitively expensive CCW or Registration process could possibly run afoul of SCOTUS. Likewise, being forced to give up other civil rights, such as being forced to submit to random police "inspections" due to having a CCL or registered gun might also be found unconstitutional.