Ammo For Sale

« « Awesome | Home | Why are anti-gun activists so violent? » »

Up next

Bane says we should work to remove restrictions from them. Charles talks about it and incrementalism. The suppressor thing can be done legislatively. After all, it’s good hearing protection for you and your neighbors. And if some ranges required suppressors, then those people who are upset because they bought a house next to a rifle range might be happy.

Well, let’s not count chickens or anything. Heller is still officially undecided. So, as for what’s next, I don’t know. But I do recommend that you consider monetarily supporting organizations who may gear up to fight gun restrictions, such as your state associations. I think that, post-Heller and assuming it goes for the good guys, quite a few laws can be challenged successfully, like NYC, Chicago, California, NJ, and MA laws.

7 Responses to “Up next”

  1. Mike M. Says:

    Suppressors aren’t just neighborly, they are a safety factor in indoor ranges. I would give long odds that suppressors will reduce lead emissions into the atmosphere (from the lead styphanate in most primers), which would allow a lot of indoor ranges to reopen.

  2. Standard Mischief Says:

    Yea, I know it hasn’t been decided yet, but assuming that the supremes chose to understand the 2nd protects rights of individuals — specifically, DC isn’t allowed to legislate out the “keep” part — I think we ought to go for the “bear” part next. Force DC to enact “may issue” just like Maryland has.

    Unfortunately, without court “standing” reform, it may be another 70 years before we get another “clean” case before the supremes.

  3. SayUncle Says:

    I think the next part is challenging all the cases that circuit courts decided using the collective rights myth of the second amendment.

  4. ParatrooperJJ Says:

    Link to bane’s site is miscoded.

  5. Xrlq Says:

    I think the next step is challenging a DC clone that sits in a state, just to clarify that the Heller rule applies to federal, state and local government alike. Handing the courts too many issues at once is a good way to lose in one fell swoop a series of cases you otherwise would have won.

  6. straightarrrow Says:

    Some European countries require suppressors by law as an act of consideration for the ears of non-shooters.

  7. straightarrrow Says:

    Funny how all the Europhiles that say we should be more Europeanly nuanced don’t pick up on this and demand that laws against suppressors be repealed.