cboldt: As of Heller, the substantive right is "you can keep a pistol at home, for self-defense." That's what the 2nd amendment has been reduced to, and yes, it pisses me off.I don't think that is true at all. The Heller decision establishes the narrowest possible scope of the protected right, but doesn't come anywhere near the entire scope.
I didn't mean for the "pistols and only at home" to be taken literally as the full scope. But as it stands, SCOTUS has ruled that a city (or any other division, e.g. state) may require a license to posses a handgun in the home, and this requirement does not run afoul of the 2nd amendment.
Although it didn't need to, the Heller Court also intimated that all the federal firearms laws are constitutional, because finding otherwise would be troubling. SCOTUS very clear implication that the 1934 NFA and 1968 GCA are permissible in light of the 2nd amendment is powerful mojo, and IMHO, people who think a District or Circuit Court are going to find otherwise are delusional. There will continue to be complete harmony in the federal court system, upholding those laws -- and now with the added heft of rhetoric in the Heller decision.
Your copy of Heller must be different from mine. My copy contains the following:
"Respondent conceded at oral argument that he does not have a problem with . . . licensing and that the Districts law is permissible so long as it is not enforced in anarbitrary and capricious manner. Tr. of Oral Arg. 7475. We therefore assume that petitioners issuance of a license will satisfy respondents prayer for relief and do not address the licensing requirement."
To me this sounds like an invitation to a later petitioner or respondent to challenge the licensing. Once again, we see that the Heller decision addresses Heller's issue as narrowly as will do the job. The full scope of the right has yet to be addressed.
The above sentence from Heller could have been written: "Nothing in this decision should be taken to cast doubt on the prohibition against keeping arms without a license." BECAUSE THE ISSUE WAS NOT ADDRESSED.