Sorry for all the posts but this decision is just that good. Hopefully someone will appreciate. More from the opinion
Constitutional rights stand through time holding fast through the ebb and flow of current controversy. Needing a solution to a current law enforcement difficulty cannot be justification for ignoring the Bill of Rights as bad policy. Bad political ideas cannot be stopped by criminalizing bad political speech. Crime waves cannot be broken with warrantless searches and unreasonable seizures. Neither can the government response to a few mad men with guns and ammunition be a law that turns millions of responsible, law-abiding people trying to protect themselves into criminals. Yet, this is the effect of Californias large-capacity magazine law.
More for those who do not have time to read the decision.
In Heller, the U.S. Supreme Court provided a simple Second Amendment test in crystal clear language. It is a test that anyone can understand. The right to keep and bear arms is a right enjoyed by law-abiding citizens to have arms that are not unusual in common use for lawful purposes like self-defense. District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 624 (2008); Heller v. District of Columbia (Heller II), 670 F.3d 1244, 1271 (2011) (Kavanaugh, J., dissenting) (In my view, Heller and McDonald leave little doubt that courts are to assess gun bans and regulations based on text, history, and tradition, not by a balancing test such as strict or intermediate scrutiny.). It is a hardware test. Is the firearm hardware commonly owned? Is the hardware commonly owned by law-abiding citizens? Is the hardware owned by those citizens for lawful purposes? If the answers are yes, the test is over. The hardware is protected.
Justice Scalia would be proud!