I know that everyone has their pet "Law" that they would like to see ruled unconstitutional but the fact is the ruling won't change any WA law(s).
From the ruling:
‘Under our precedents, if a Bill of Rights guarantee is fundamental from an American perspective, then, unless stare decisis counsels otherwise, that guarantee is fully binding on the States and thus limits (but by no means eliminates) their ability to devise solutions to social problems that suit local needs and values. As noted by the 38 States that have appeared in this case as amici supporting petitioners, “tate and local experimentation with reasonable firearms regulations will continue under the Second Amendment.’ ~ Justice Alito~
Not only are reasonable regulations allowed, note the phrase "their ability to devise solutions to social problems that suit local needs and values. If the Legislators deem it necessary to limit the right to carry a pistol to those over 21 to solve a local social problem then it's allowed. Likewise should they decide it necessary to separate firearms from areas where alcohol is served and minors are excluded. McDonald won't change these, only another case and subsequent ruling. Based on my reading of the decision I won't see it happen in my lifetime.
McDonald won't have much, if any, effect here in WA. Look for changes in Chicago, New York, and any other area where just the basic right to have a firearm, period, is severely restricted. If one has the time, read all 214 pages of the ruling with opinions. For one thing, it points out how moronic a couple of the "Lib's" on the Court are and how truly left they lean.
