My point is that the circuit court ignored 150 years of law - didn't even discuss it. That's either abysmal ignorance or deliberate malice, my vote's for the latter.
That split may be resolved, if the 9th Circuit undertakes en banc review. A vote on that is due from then "real soon now."
-- My point is that the circuit court ignored 150 years of law - didn't even discuss it. --
It also bastardized the Presser decision, asserting that is stands for the OPPOSITE proposition that it states.
-- That's either abysmal ignorance or deliberate malice, my vote's for the latter. --
I vote "deliberate malice" too. Also, the SCOTUS, in Heller, did the same thing with the Miller case - read it for the OPPOSITE of what it stands for, as to they type of weapon contemplated by the framers to be within the ambit of the RKBA.
There's no way out of the conundrum, best I can tell. Congress, the federal Court, and the executive ALL aim to minimize the ability of the people to project force.