"It will have to be decided in future cases," Scalia said on Fox News Sunday.
But there were legal precedents from the days of the Founding Fathers
that banned frightening weapons which a constitutional originalist like
himself must recognize. There were also "locational limitations" on
where weapons could be carried, the justice noted.
When
asked if that kind of precedent would apply to assault weapons, or
100-round ammunition magazines like those used in the recent Colorado
movie theater massacre, Scalia declined to speculate. "We'll see," he
said. '"It will have to be decided."
As an originalist scholar, Scalia looks to the text of the
Constitution—which confirms the right to bear arms—but also the context
of 18th-century history. “They had some limitations on the nature of arms that could be borne," he told host Chris Wallace.
1 Comments in Response to Scalia: Guns May be Regulated
How easily we forget the basics of our language. Scalia apparently has forgotten the definition of 'infringe' and refuses to look it up in a dictionary. But....then again....it might be he thinks he is so god-like that he can change the the definition, or cast it aside. We 'are' a police-state.