Justices talk in hypotheticals because they can’t state their specific opinions on untested issues till it’s before the court.
Scalia would not vote to ban most if not any types of small arms because of the obvious way in which he interprets the 2nd amendment. If a ban or restriction places a defacto infringement on a right, he’ll strike it down.
Look at Heller. He cites specifically the defensive need of a pistol and how it must be at the ready to properly defend.
[[If a ban or restriction places a defacto infringement on a right, he’ll strike it down.]]
Just like roberts struck down a mandate which fines/taxes the people and which places a defacto infringement on our rights’ (simply for existing)?
Many in the conservative world never imagined roberts would rule i na biased manner- yet he did- just sayin