A double edged sword there. The ruling is that only state or federal can prohibit firearms. Thus there is an undertone that the state or federal government CAN do such things. When in reality the ruling should be that the initial ban violated the Constitution and should have been thrown out on those grounds. This is how you win an inch but lose a mile.
A double edged sword there. The ruling is that only state or federal can prohibit firearms. Thus there is an undertone that the state or federal government CAN do such things. When in reality the ruling should be that the initial ban violated the Constitution and should have been thrown out on those grounds. This is how you win an inch but lose a mile.