Roger,
I agree...much of what Chicago has proposed should be very vulnerable if the court applies strict scrutiny. Even intermediate review, if honestly applied, should put a lot of these proposals into question.
The Supreme Court in Heller passed over the issue of registration requirements, noting that Heller hadn't argued that issue. That doesn't mean that registration requirements are per se reasonable or permissible under Heller or McDonald...
Skoien makes clear that the "reasonableness" language in Heller and McDonald does not make it a walk in the park for a gov't seeking to restrict the 2nd Amendment right. Both elevated standards (strict scrutiny and intermediate review) discussed in Skoien are tough on the gov't, putting the burden of proof on it to present evidence, not just arugment, to make its case successfully.
At bottom, what the Mayor and his minions seemed to have missed, or perhaps simply refuse to see, is that Heller and McDonald recognized a FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT of the law abiding citizen to, at least, keep a handgun in the home for self defense.
Driving is a privilege, not a right. Cars kill more people annually then guns by a wide margin, and are the leading cause of death for children. Does Chicago impose any special requirements its residents who want to drive in the Windy City? My guess is no.
Why would a right be subjected to greater regulation/restriction then a privilege? Public safety is implicated with both cars and handguns.
What other fundamental right, to be exercised at home, requires the kind of procedural hurdles that Chicago contemplates? Does one need to jump through such hoops to buy a laptop computer to access the Internet...or to read a book, or argue politics in the home? Of course not.
McDonald made clear that the 2nd Amendment is a fundamental right and that the Court would not accept treating it differently simply because it's about guns. After all, that's why they incorporated the 2nd Amendment...they applied the well established (if controversial in some legal circles) incorporation doctrine and treated the fundamental right recognized in Heller the same as any other fundamental right. Result? Incorporation.
One question I have is this: What's the reaction amongst Chicagoans to the McDonald decision? Has the question been polled? Nothing in the media coverage I've seen has attempted to get a handle on how the citizens of that toddlin' town feel about this. A few "man in the street interviews" hardly suffice. What do the people want? Is there no other voice but Daley's?
