Clayton Cramer notes that Parker is about as good as it gets for a test case:

4. Unlike many of the right to keep and bear arms cases that have worked their way up through the courts over the years, where the defendant is a criminal of some sort, or at least an unsympathetic character, such as Dr. Emerson in USA v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001), we have squeaky clean plaintiffs on this case, so the Court doesn’t have to worry about releasing a criminal if they make the right decision.

5. Rather than directly challenging the bearing of arms, or the right to own some rather unusual or exotic weapon, this case involves the right to have a loaded and functional handgun in your home for self-defense. This is about as much of a no-brainer as there can be for the courts. While the decision doesn’t directly challenge the constitutionality of a handgun registration law, it does make it clear that the current DC strategy of prohibiting new registrations for handguns is unconstitutional.

Via Les, who I’d also like to strangle for giving me an ear worm.

Posted in uncategorized on March 14th, 2007 by SayUncle | RSS 2.0 |