• bostonbananarama@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    3 months ago

    I agree with the right, but Bruen was a trainwreck of a decision. Historical perspective is an absolutely ridiculous basis for determining the outer limits of the right.

    • theyoyomaster@lemmy.worldOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      3 months ago

      Yeah, the issue was it was a direct response to courts deliberately ignoring all other precedents to purposefully deny the right. If you can’t apply scrutiny due to your own personal biases you lose scrutiny.

      • bostonbananarama@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        That’s not really true though. There were very few SCOTUS precedents on the 2A, really just Cruikshank and Presser until recently. Heller really changed it all in 2008, being the first court to find an individual right. And the 2A didn’t get incorporated until 2010 in McDonald.

        The issue is that bad precedent is begging to be overturned. I can’t imagine Bruen standing for a long time without being overturned or distinguished by a subsequent case.