Aside from the Second Amendment issue here, what I’ve never understood is how is it constitutional for the government to treat citizens subjectively when issuing permits for anything?
If I pass the DMV driving, written and eye tests can the clerk say I don’t really “need” a drivers license because I can walk, call a cab or take a bus? Or I apply for a building permit, meet the objective criteria and the inspector says I’m not getting the permit because I don’t really “need” a room addition on my house.
There should be no such thing as “may issue” for any government permit system. You meet a set of objective criteria, you get the permit. Period.
Exactly correct. The entire idea of an official making subjective decisions about who can get what benefit is a direct throwback to the “rule of men” instead of the “rule of law”.
Much of our whole legal system was designed to prevent exactly this situation. But “progressives” love it because it gives the state enormous power.
A lot of “zoning” is subjective as well, and for the same reason. It gives the local elites tremendous power.
Most zoning codes start off with something like: anything not specifically permitted by this code is illegal.