Fabarms L4s Initial Hunter Compact
It was an interpretation. Yes. Just like District of Columbia v. Heller was a Supreme Court interpretation of what "A well regulated militia" means in the second amendment as it applies to citizens that are NOT in a well regulated militia.Roe vs Wade was not a law that that the Court ruled on. It was a law THEY made up. Not within their purview or right. That's why it was over ruled and sent back to legislators who make ,not interpretate law.
Linguists almost universally agree that according to the English Language, the way that single sentence is written, it means "Because we don't have a standing army, the citizens need to be ready to grab arms to defend the homeland." (see the dissent portion of the linked SCOTUS decision, Heller.) Heller's majority came up with a different interpretation. Now that interpretation can be changed.
Law abiding citizens accept that the first and second amendments have limitations.
You can't shout "fire!" in a crowded theater.
You can't own a surface to air missile.
No matter how useful that missile would be in defending against an attack against the homeland. The only question is.. "Where is the line of what you can and can't own without special privelege?"
People don't like it, but that's how it is It seems like more determinations will go back to the States and not be federally universal. California restrictions haven't been totally overturned, so we just have to wait for the courts to grind it out.
I have posted references to original sources.