Here's an interesting article from the fallout of the recent 5-4 Supreme Court gun decision. They said that a locality cannot deny the right to bear arms. Apparently, the language of the well-regulated militia did not count.
So in Atlanta, there's a challenge to the airport ban on carrying a concealed weapon. See the NY Times article.
In San Francisco, there's an NRA challenge to the ban on loaded weapons in public housing.
Of course, there's the overturning of the Washington DC law and the challenge in Chicago handgun rules. Notice that the big cities are trying to restrict gun - gee, I wonder why?
I'm sure there are some interesting arguments in the decision about how a handgun is an arm that everyone has the right to have, but a machine gun, howitzer and tank is not.
Well hell, if you can have a concealed weapon in an airport, why not in an airplane or college or a government office. Maybe Congressman should also have the right to have a handgun as should any visitor. As soon as you restrict it, you are restricting a right.
Maybe this is a good thing. If the NRA gets to push these silly argument, maybe there will be a new constitutional amendment that modifies the Second Amendment.
At minimum, everyone should be allowed to carry a handgun at Supreme Court hearings.
Meanwhile read this article on how Tasers are more effective than guns for self-defense.