The reverberations from the Supreme Court’s McDonald decision—striking down Chicago’s handgun ban and incorporating the Second Amendment right to bear arms—continue. Gun control advocates have regrouped. In a posting on helenair.com, the acting director of the Montanans United Against Gun Violence rambles on about the “common ground” between gun rights and gun control groups. You know: firearms ownership provisions against criminals, mentally ill people and “careless, accident-prone” potential purchasers. Huh? Anyway, Robert McKelvey relies on his pals over at the Illinois Council on Handgun Violence for a laundry list of what gun control folk now consider “reasonable” restrictions . . .
“The court’s opinion clearly allows for requiring background checks on all gun sales, restricting carrying loaded guns in public, mandating gun owners to register firearms and undergo training, allowing states and municipalities to license gun dealers, regulating military-style semi-automatic assault weapons, enacting waiting periods, limiting gun sales per month, and forcing gun manufacturers to employ ‘microstamping’ technology on all new gun sales, among other measures. Furthermore, we are confident that when the gun lobby litigates and challenges these policies the courts will ultimately uphold the constitutionality of these gun laws.”
The battle lines are drawn.
Eight comments over there so far on the article, and all eight comments are pro-gun. That's a good start.