McDonald v. Chicago

The Supreme Court set the stage for a historic ruling on gun rights and the 2nd Amendment by agreeing today to hear a challenge to Chicago's ban on handguns.

At issue is whether state and local gun-control ordinances can be struck down as violating the "right to keep and bear arms" in the 2nd Amendment.

link

This case is brought about due to a gross miscarriage of justice by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, who declared that the 2nd Amendment does not apply to State and local government. In essence stating that a local governing body can disregard an Amendment of the United States Constitution.

Aren't States prosecuted or otherwise disciplined for that in every other instance? The due process clause of the 14th Amendment which states in part: No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

A reading of Chicago's gun registration laws [which ban handguns for but LE and Court Officers] gives cover to the agenda of an outright ban of all firearms, but the odious provisions of registration make it clear what their intent is.

I stand firmly with Otis McDonald, but have doubts about the outcome of the case.