This ruling should put the onus on them to justify compeling grounds for denial now.
Basically, it’s going to require more lawsuits citing Heller as precedent. And in MA, for example, the judges up there will probably just ignore Heller and do whatever they want anyhow, even though the language is pretty clear.
It’s unfortunate that it even had to come to this. The language of the Constitution is plain and clear, and doesn’t need nine old farts in black robes to interpret it. The fact that we’ve got to sit here and hang on every word that comes out of the Supreme Court to find out if our clearly-stated right to keep and bear arms still exists after today...well, that right there is an indication of the coup that the judiciary has pulled off in this country in the last hundred years.
The Supremes largely made the right decision, but it should never have come to this point in the first place.
}:-)4
I am thinking the same thing. I wonder what GOAL has brewing in terms of launching a test case. Under no circumstances would any license fee be appropriate; we now have a right to own firearms.