I thought that the “Trigger Locks” requirement was also struck down. Or am I confused...again.
I have the exact same sense.I could be wrong however...because I certainly ain’t no lawyer.
I thought the same thing, but I remember it was in the context of the requirement to disassemble the gun. Perhaps it was only the disassembly that was struck down.
I simply wouldn’t use the lock. Have the lock handy, but don’t use it.
Perhaps someone will get rich inventing a quick-touch lock release.
>>I thought that the “Trigger Locks” requirement was also struck down. Or am I confused...again.
You’re not confused. #3 in the “Held:” portion of the decision...
“3. The handgun ban and the trigger-lock requirement (as applied to self-defense) violate the Second Amendment.”
I seem to remember there being a Federal law allocating jail time for politicians and bureaucrats that make rules which violate the B.O.R. Wish I could remember the citation...
The majority opinion clearly frowned upon trigger locks, but the remedy granted in the case referred only to the issuing of permits.
If DC wants to lose again, though, they can keep this up.