[robertpaulsen]

Your individual RKBA is protected by your state constitution (which is why gun laws, like concealed carry, vary from state to state). California is one of, I believe, six states where the state constitution is silent on arms.

Because of that, there's nothing in the state constitution that would prevent the California legislature from banning all guns. If they did, however, there would probably be a federal constitutional challenge since the states are expected to defend the republic (via the organized and unorganized militias) and totally disarming the public would prevent that.

[MindBender26]

>If they did, however, there would probably be a federal constitutional challenge since the states are expected to defend the republic (via the organized and unorganized militias) and totally disarming the public would prevent that.

I agree completely. State constitutions are silent on many issues, but rights on those issues are still guaranteed under the U.S constitution.

That said, I'm deep into reading case law as to how DC effectively banned all firearms. Certainly some entity (ILA, etc.) supported a case up to SCOTUS.

Will let all know. Of course, we can also discuss how dueling, i.e. "Trial by Mortal Combat," is still legal under Florida law. (No, don't go kill anyone!)

[MindBender26]

From initial research, it appears that Parker et al. v. District of Columbia et al. is still active and crawling through the courts.

The one problem I keep seeing is that "Miller v. United States,"SCOTUS, 1939 seems to still be the decided case on the "militia" definition and that is not in our favor.

I can see the current SCOTUS ruling in our favor in some gun cases, but overturing the militia definition in "Miller" may be a stretch.