Old McDonald

Regardless of our view that the right to keep and bare arms is a fundamental unalienable right - granted to us by our Creator, the McDonald decision was not a good decision. That Chicago passed stupid laws the restricted ownership of guns is not at issue - what is at issue is the rights of States to regulate what goes on within their borders. The Constitution was originally meant to be a safeguard against the Federal Government from infringing upon our rights and the 9th and 10th Amendments left it to the individuals and various states to control what went on within their own domains. Along comes the 14th Amendment and all of the subsequent misinterpretations - including McDonald - and now we have a situation wherein Congress can now tell us, with regard to guns and quite likely Obamacare, what we can and cannot have or have to do. You may have disagreed with Chicago's handgun ban but under the Constitution's protections it was wholly within their right to prevent individuals from possessing handguns. The NRA and their stooge lawyers are now in full campaign mode trying to convince us that no state will get away with the one-gun-per-person laws or one-a-month-laws, but we know that those laws do not "infringe" by definition - and sadly, we now know that Congress can just flat out make them laws of the land, because the Second Amendment is "Incorporated." The NRA got lazy, instead of letting Chicago voters do their job, by voting out those Aldermen that supported the handgun ban, they, the NRA, trampled on the responsibilities of the electorate. It would appear that the majority of Chicagoans have not issue with the ban or they would have voted out those that passed the ban. So, here is my prediction - the NRA's favorite conceal-carry law, will be one of the first the goes when Congress wakes up to realize that they can now ban it, as they did assault weapons - because that does not qualify as an "infringement."