[Little Ray]

It scares the Hell out me. On Constitutional grounds this is a slam dunk. But the SCOTUS doesn’t feel particularly bound by the Constitution; heck, we've had Supreme Court Justices citing foreign laws as precedent! At one swell foop the Second Amendment could become as meaningless as the Ninth and Tenth Amendments.

[tpaine]

the SCOTUS doesn't feel particularly bound by the Constitution; -- At one swell foop the Second Amendment could become as meaningless as the Ninth and Tenth Amendments.

The SCOTUS is just as bound by our Constitutions clear words as any other level of gov't in the USA.

A 'decision' by them, - claiming that our rights to own and carry arms can be infringed by 'reasonable' [health & safety] 'regulations' will be unenforceable, just as booze prohibition was unenforceable.

Fiat prohibitions on guns, booze, drugs, whatever, -- are unconstitutional under our concept of 'due process of law'.

As Justice Harlan recognized:
     " -- [T]he full scope of the liberty guaranteed by the Due Process Clause `cannot be found in or limited by the precise terms of the specific guarantees elsewhere provided in the Constitution.
This `liberty´ is not a series of isolated points pricked out in terms of the taking of property;
the freedom of speech, press, and religion;
the right to keep and bear arms;
the freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures; and so on. 
It is a rational continuum which, broadly speaking, includes a freedom from all substantial arbitrary impositions and purposeless restraints --"