Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: I don't see how (one part of) the new NY gun law can be constitutional [View all]cthulu2016
(10,960 posts)22. The matter is not limited to your understanding of it
I am talking about a legitimate legal matter having to do with standards of scrutiny in American judicial practice.
We know that guns face something more than rational basis because DC surely had a rational basis for their gun laws struck down in Heller.
We know that guns face a lower standard than compelling state interest, narrowly tailored, etc, of the sort we see in attempts to, for instance, regulate publications of religions.
We know the gun scrutiny standard is somewhere in the middle there.
But we don't yet know where. The Heller and McDonald decisions are faily new, by judicial standards.
This has not all been hashed out.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
54 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I don't see how (one part of) the new NY gun law can be constitutional [View all]
cthulu2016
Jan 2013
OP
Government absolutely has a right to restrict what types of weapons are available
Hugabear
Jan 2013
#6
actually that's true - the wording say 'arms' NOT 'all and every type of arms'
samsingh
Jan 2013
#53
Of course, since it's so easily avoided (just remove the bayonet lug) it's hard to argue standing
Recursion
Jan 2013
#30
Don't really give a damn if it's unconstitutional if it saves lives... nt
Comrade_McKenzie
Jan 2013
#49