Heller Stuff
The fight begins March 18. Also, Gura on the DOJ’s position:
The Department’s fears about the implications of securing a meaningful Second Amendment right are overblown and not grounded in fact or law. Look for our response to their brief, and the others, on February 4.
Even the Wall Street Journal jumps in:
The amicus brief filed by Solicitor General Paul Clement agrees with this part of the D.C. Circuit ruling. But then it goes on a bender about violent felons wielding machine guns, urging the Supreme Court to reject the legal standard applied by Judge Silberman. Instead, the SG invites the Supremes to hand down an elaborate balancing test that would weigh “the strength of the government’s interest in enforcement of the relevant restriction” against an individual’s right to bear arms.
This is supposedly necessary because of this single phrase in Judge Silberman’s 58-page ruling: “Once it is determined — as we have done — that handguns are ‘Arms’ referred to in the Second Amendment, it is not open to the District to ban them” (our emphasis). This has alarmed the lawyers at Justice, eliciting their dire warnings that somehow Judge Silberman’s logic would bar the regulation of M-16s, felons with guns, or perhaps even Sherman tanks.
January 23rd, 2008 at 10:52 am
Well…the DOJ may have a point. Remember Tench Coxe and “every terrible implement of the soldier?” I certainly think that the 2nd ought to be taken to mean that Joe Citizen may own any infantry weapon.
January 23rd, 2008 at 3:25 pm
If you think about it, the state of the art infantry rifle in 1789 was the flintlock musket. I think you could logically argue that the framers of the Constitution meant for citizens to be able to arm themselves with weaponry equal to issue military rifles (ie the M-16/M4). Not that I think the court will go that far; but I think the argument can be made, just as I think you could argue “Shall not be infringed” is a sound agrument against registration
January 23rd, 2008 at 6:35 pm
Uh, Sherman Tanks ARE “legal”. So are machine guns. After Ronnie Raygun BANNED the manufacture of NEW machine guns for CIVILIAN ownership, prices skyrocketed. An AR15 legally converted to full auto was about $1000 in 86. Now they are $15K and new semi-auto AR’s are still $750. H&K will sell a new MP-5 to a cop shop for about $1k. To buy a CIVILIAN LEGAL MP-5 that was made prior to 86 will cost you about $20K. And newer guns are simply unavaliable. And of the MILLION or so LEGAL machine guns REGISTERED since 1934, exactly ONE has been traced to use in a crime. And that was when a COP pulled off a contract killing.
January 23rd, 2008 at 6:44 pm
Yes. Every terrible implement of the soldier, up to and including the modern-day equivalent of horse artillery. Me, I want an A-10.