Doesn't Heller make Feinstein's Proposed Legislation Unconstitutional?

[Werewolf]

It is my understanding that the Heller decision by SCOTUS made it clear that it was unconstitutional for a gun ban that banned an entire class of guns in common use.

If that understanding is correct then how can the nonsense that Feinstein is proposing pass constitutional muster? And if it can't why would responsible legislators at the federal level even let it out of committee?

Inquiring minds want to to know...

 

[abajaj11]

I agree. It seems feinstein's Bill may be a red herring. the real one the libs want to pass may be the mag cap one. we need to ALL write to our reps on THAt one for sure.

 

[rawhide]

It is my understanding that the Heller decision by SCOTUS made it clear that it was unconstitutional for a gun ban that banned an entire class of guns in common use.

If that understanding is correct then how can the nonsense that Feinstein is proposing pass constitutional muster? And if it can't why would responsible legislators at the federal level even let it out of committee?

Inquiring minds want to to know...

If Congress were dominated by responsible legislators that followed the Constitution then much of the mess we are in and the liberties we're trying to protect wouldn't be an issue.

 

[Coded-Dude]

D.C. vs Heller says no outright ban in Home(SCOTUS)
Moore vs Madigan says no outright carry ban(CA7 - SCOTUS should re-affirm)
US vs Miller says that the sorts of weapons protected are those in common use at the time(SCOTUS)

 

[farmerbyron]

These politicians couldn't care less what is constitutional or not. They want gun control and they want it now. Constitution be damned.

 

[JxxxOxxxE]

was the 1994 ban ever challenged anywhere? I was 12 then...I tried google, but couldn't seem to find anything...

 

[angsniper]

The Constitution has become irrelevant just like it's citizens.

 

[okav8tor]

I suspect it lies in the definition of "class". If "class" was defined as all semi automated rifles then she is not banning an entire class of weapons with her proposed legislation. I think it is a moot point anyway since whatever Obama is for the congress is against so even if it comes to a vote it should be defeated ....

 

[rawhide]

This president has shown not only a disrespect for the Constitution but also a disregard for limitations placed on the executive branch by the Constitution. As he as already done with other issues (immigration, environment, border FFLs, etc) he will impose regulatory laws through executive agencies.

 

[Murph]

D.C. vs Heller says no outright ban in Home(SCOTUS)
Moore vs Madigan says no outright carry ban(CA7 - SCOTUS should re-affirm)
US vs Miller says that the sorts of weapons protected are those in common use at the time(SCOTUS)

I thought that in D.C. vs Heller the Supremes ruled that the 2nd Amendment protected an individual right. Am I mistaken?

These politicians couldn't't care less what is constitutional or not. They want gun control and they want it now. Constitution be damned.

Truth! This is one of the non-trivial problems that demands a solution as we restore Constitutional government. The set of politicians comfortable with ignoring the rules, if the rules do not support whatever policy or legislation they are after, are IMHO a clear and present danger and should be given high priority.
I just don't know of any elegant solutions to counter the damage they inflict.
Fortunately they are still vulnerable to traditional political activism. It just seems to take forever to get rid of them.

was the 1994 ban ever challenged anywhere? I was 12 then...I tried Google, but couldn't seem to find anything...

I read somewhere that the Supreme Court had refused to hear challenges 'pro or con' about the 2nd Amendment since the 1939 Miller case. Google was no help to me either, although the pdf I found at Law Center to 'Destroy the 2nd Amendment'* about ways to create another ASW ban is proving to be quite interesting.

The Constitution has become irrelevant just like it's citizens.

What does this mean? For me the Constitution of the US of A is highly relevant, a superb piece of memetic engineering that contains important first principles and concepts, still useful over 200 years later, to anyone who, by either duty or desire, strive to make the world a better place. And as to the irrelevance of citizens, maybe the irrelevant citizens are identifiable for the amount of time they spend whining, bitching and groaning about how hard life is and how everybody picks on them and it's just not fair, and how nobody likes them everybody hates them they guess they'll go eat worms, and about how they are a tragic romantic figure who is so much cooler than the rest of us with their bitchen pathos and hot black threads, and blah blah blaaaah blahh blah. Heck maybe even they shouldn't be branded as irrelevant, their whinging might strengthen a persons resolve as often as it damages some persons morale.

This president has shown not only a disrespect for the Constitution but also a disregard for limitations placed on the executive branch by the Constitution. As he as already done with other issues (immigration, environment, border FFLs, etc) he will impose regulatory laws through executive agencies.

This makes him different from every other president from the 20th century in what way? I bring this up not to support President "I'm smarter than you" Obama, who IMHO is an especially egregious example of what happens when you spend the majority of your life among the political class.

Instead I want to point out that bad as he is we have had some arguably worse, and we are still here. That our elders in the defend & restore the 2nd Amendment culture/coalition have made huge strides in reversing the damage inflicted during the latter half of the 20th century.** That while the war is far from over and there are still battles to be waged, one still retains the power of personal choice to choose love or hate, liberty or slavery, fanaticism or rationality, or life instead of death.

I'm reminded of the end of the poem Ulysses by Lord Tennyson and especially the last sentence

Old age hath yet his honor and his toil.
Death closes all; but something ere the end,
Some work of noble note, may yet be done,
Not unbecoming men that strove with gods.
The lights begin to twinkle from the rocks;
The long day wanes; the slow moon climbs; the deep
Moans round with many voices. Come, my friends,
'Tis not too late to seek a newer world.
Push off, and sitting well in order smite
The sounding furrows; for my purpose holds
To sail beyond the sunset, and the baths
Of all the western stars, until I die.
It may be that the gulfs will wash us down;
It may be we shall touch the Happy Isles,
And see the great Achilles, whom we knew.
Though much is taken, much abides; and though
We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are,
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.

*translation

**It took way long to realize that what the hippies and other peaceniks meant when they told us to 'give peace a chance' was really 'give helplessness a chance'. We gave it a chance, it sucked, and we are not going to try it again.