Guntastic!

The Supreme Court issued their much awaited (by some) ruling (pdf) on the DC Handgun Ban. The Uncle is pleased, as is Nathan Moore...I'm fine with it. So far as I can tell, by reading the summary, nothing has changed anywhere else except for in DC, whose ban was over-the-top and unnecessarily punitive towards handguns.

What has changed? Well, the militia provision inside the 2nd amendment has been ruled unimportant, and therefore the individual right to keep and bear arms has been affirmed. Score for English majors.

But at the same time, it is still constitutional, according to the Scalia decision, to require registration and licensing of firearms "[a]ssuming he is not disqualified from exercising Second Amendment rights, the District must permit Heller to register his handgun and must issue him a license to carry it in the home," as well as limitations towards which weapons could be held. Scalia's decision has upheld the limitations of the 2nd amendment, stating:

It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.

So this might be a bit of a blow to those who were challenging restrictions on the carrying of firearms on college campuses.

I haven't read the dissenting opinions, nor do I really care all that much. So long as reasonable restrictions on the buying and selling of firearms, as well as who can carry and where, are still in place, I say lock and load.