I wouldn’t bet on that. The Parker decision is very long, did you read the whole thing? It affirms that states can regulate the bearing of arms, even though that wasn’t at issue in Parker. Washington D.C. is the only place in this country that actually prohibits handgun ownership. The next worst places are New York, Boston, and Chicago. Although you have to jump through a lot of hoops in New York, you will eventually get the permit to own the handgun. I don’t know about Boston and Chicago, I’ve heard it is the same in those cities.
Chicago bans handguns. As does Wilmette, Illinois and Morton Grove, Illinois (Illinois has home rule). There may be more, I don't know.
You cannot own, possess, keep, store, carry, use, borrow, hold or fondle a handgun in those cities.
Are there exceptions? Of course. Cops, aldermen, other city officials, their bodyguards and, of course, the thousands of criminals and gang bangers. But I'm talking about the general public.
There was a recent story of a homeowner in Wilmette who shot a burglar as the burglar entered the house. The homeowner was arrested for possessing a handgun.
Well, I would never have thought the court would have ruled as in Kelo or the McCain-Finegold challenge, both completely against the Constitution in spirit and letter, either, but it did.
There seems to me to be certain rights the people have that they cannot have if central authority and socialism is to rule as completely as the movements at the fed level would imply.
It's clear to me, and I'd say to those working for the goal of a socialist nation, the people cannot be allowed to have guns, legally and ubiquitous as they are now.
Especially with an intention to open our borders and merge the US with Canada and Mexico, as Mr. Bush has said more than twice and the existence of a government agency existing to work toward that end testifies.
Regardless of the Parker decision about states regulating arms, if the SC says differently, that decision will rule.
I hope I'm wrong and you're right, but he current decisions of the SC aren't hopeful.
I'll make another prediction. At least one, but probably both, of Mr. Bush's SC appointments will side with DC. They are both internationalist, as is Mr. Bush. This was said of Roberts twice by the media during his confirmation process.
