I'm wondering where this is going to go. Various states and cities have been arguing that Heller doesn't apply to them because the 2nd Amendment only constrains the federal government. Apparently the lower courts have been split on that.
IMO this is very dangerous ground for the libs. If they win and the court finds that the 2nd Amendment only constrains the federal government, then it would seem to follow that none of the others would apply to states, either. Wouldn't that theoretically allow states to set their own voting ages, restrict speech or religion, deny due process, or even reinstitute slavery? That's an extreme example, but it cuts to the core of 220 years of Constitutional interpretation. There's an awful lot of law on the books that says our country believes the Bill of Rights applies to all levels of government. You can't cherry pick which ones apply based on your politics.
But if the court finds that the 2nd Amendment constrains states the way the other amendments do, then Heller becomes the law of the land and the entire gun control movement falls apart. I'm not a lawyer, but I'm having a hard time seeing an upside for liberals no matter how this turns out.
I think this might explain why more attacks are being launched against ammunition -- they're thinking the 2nd Amendment applies to weapons, not ammunition. Of course, that would set up a follow up legal battle over the idea of whether denying someone ammunition is denying them arms.
As prices increase, many shooters are looking for ways to take the bite out of their shooting budget. Here are ten tips to help:
Take the bite out of your shooting budget:
If you are like most, you did not buy nearly enough ammo over the past few years. Most of us told ourselves that our budgets just couldn’t be stretched any farther. So our ammunition reserves either dwindled or stayed static despite knowing that prices were rising. Boy are we sorry now!...