This is the fundamental test for SCOTUS. This is the kind of case that Freepers who posted 'this is not the case we want in front of SCOTUS' on the Emerson threads were waiting for, right?
Am I right, or am I wrong?
Reinhardt dismissed the plaintiffs' claims "Because the Second Amendment does not confer an individual right to own or possess arms...". The challenge could have involved muskets and the ruling would have been the same -- you don't have the right to "own or possess" any weapon.
Here's the problem. If this goes to SCOTUS, the gun control freaks are going to make this case about the right to own "assault weapons" (the original case) rather than an individual's RKBA.