[marktwain]

But I would rather suffer the sporadic injustices of "may issue" statism when there ARE many surrounding states that permit freedom, than gamble and lose at the federal/SCOTUS level.

Those freedoms are under constant attack through various means. Most particularly by paid for, slyly worded, referendum bankrolled by out of state billionaires.

Unfortunately, many states are at risk.

We must move forward to actively protect our Second Amendment rights.

Another positive tool are the state constitutions. There are only six states that do not have a right to keep and bear arms protection of some sort.

Some of those are quite weak, others are strong.

Iowa is one of the six, and has a strong state movement to place a strong RKBA amendment in place.

[DoodleBob]

I (think) we may be on the same page. I am NOT advocating inaction...I wasn't aware of what's happening in Iowa. I would LOVE for a similar groundswell to happen in NJ (which also lacks a state constitutional KABA guarantee). It has come and gone in fits and spurts since 2001, with hopes raised during Republican administrations only to be dashed during Dem admins. There are small wins from time to time, which helps us push on at the State level. THAT is where I believe vigorous action is required.

Federal protections where they exist should also be vigorously defended and expanded where prudential. But, call me a coward, I am not willing to risk the gains made at state levels to help six states' residents UNTIL I feel more confident that sanity would reign at the SCOTUS level. Indeed, Heller was a 5-4 decision...too close for my liking. I feel pretty good that Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh would rule with fidelity. The four statists would rule against. While Roberts was on "our side" for Heller, post-Obamacare I don't feel good....if RBG retires and we get a good one in there, my opinion may change.