Second Amendment Math: Britt + Heller = Whitaker?

A divided court of appeals decided another significant gun case this week. But before I talk about the opinion in State v. Whitaker, I'll briefly summarize the legal backdrop for the case. In June 2008, the United States Supreme Court decided District of Columbia v. Heller, holding that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm and to use it for traditionally lawful purposes. It invalidated a District of Columbia law that effectively banned the private ownership of handguns. In August 2009, the North Carolina Supreme Court decided Britt v. North Carolina, holding that as it applied to plaintiff Barney Britt, G.S. 14-415.1, our felon-in-possession statute, violated Article I, section 30 of the North Carolina Constitution. The relevant parts of that article are textually identical to the Second Amendment. The upshot of these two cases has been considerable uncertainty about the scope of the individual right to possess a firearm. This earlier post discusses some of the confusion and notes that the United States Supreme Court is currently considering a case, McDonald v. Chicago, that may answer some of the questions in this area, including whether the Second Amendment is "incorporated" in the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause and so applies to the states. This week, the court of appeals chimed in with Whitaker. Defendant Douglas Whitaker was a convicted felon who kept several -- okay, eleven -- long guns at his home, even after being warned several times that it was illegal for him to possess them. He [...]