Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Lee
You're leaving out the part of the DC law that says ALL long guns must be kept unloaded and inoperable at all times. How is that reasonable for self-defense? How is it reasonable for such a crime-ridden city to tell its residents that only the city government may protect its citizens and no one may protect themselves? That's outrageous.
None of CA's crazy gun laws are reasonable at all. Any criminal who's willing to use a gun in a crime is not at all deterred by a potentials weapons possession charge for having an "assault" rifle. When's the last time you heard about someone taking down a liquor store with a $7k .50 cal. rifle that weighs 20 lbs.? Not criminal's first choice of guns.
|
The DC law says a long gun in the home must be unloaded/disassembled OR with a trigger lock.
http://www.nraila.org/statelawpdfs/DCCL.pdf So you can have your shotgun loaded at home, trigger lock on, and key - according to this, I guess the key can be tethered to the gun.
Okay, maybe the requirement that long guns be disabled would be overturned. So you can now have long guns, but not handguns. Would that be what pro-gunners would like? Not nearly, I think.
As for CA's laws, the typical legal test of "reasonable" is not if you or I think it makes sense or is a good idea, the test is usually a
lot more deferential to the government entity's findings, priorities, and judgment.
My point is,
if the Court decides there is an individual right but it is subject to "reasonable government regulation" or some test like that, then outside of a handful of places with pretty extreme gun laws, there probably won't be that much practical impact.