Now, Rosa , before we get all indignant or sarcastic (and I certainly hope you were being sarcastic), let's not allow ourselves to fall prey to exaggerated readings of today's gun decision. For example, let's not overlook Pages 54-55 of the court's opinion :
Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose. ... Although we do not undertake anexhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of theSecond Amendment, nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.
There a lot to digest in these lengthy opinions. (And I certainly won't get through them anytime soon, at least not during working hours.) But to suggest that this case opens the door to hunting in Rock Creek Park is a bit like suggesting that Lawrence v. Texas legalized homosexual romps in Rock Creek Park. Let's all agree to take a few deep breaths before we go around the bend.
And besides, there are more important decision to attend to, like Morgan Stanley ...