Eugen Volokh: How not to think about gun control laws (or speech restrictions)

This is an excellent analysis by Eugene Volokh.  It illustrates the lack of logic of disarmists.

I posted yesterday about a case (in which I’m consulting) that challenges Cal. Civil Code § 26820:

No handgun or imitation handgun, or placard advertising the sale or other transfer thereof, shall be displayed in any part of the premises where it can readily be seen from the outside.

This drew an odd comment that struck me as worth analyzing:

Just what the nation needs, an opening door to the prospect of a literal arms race conducted with TV commercials touting the firepower advantages of various semi-autos.

The commenter conceded that the law is unconstitutional, but suggested that people shouldn’t help challenge it:

I’m asking you, what are your values here? … Is there something wrong with a lawyer who says, “You know, that law can serve a good purpose, but pushing it to the max in the most extreme way doesn’t serve a good purpose, and it isn’t something I personally want to do?”

Now while I’m generally skeptical of gun control laws, there are plausible arguments for some such laws, even if I on balance think that the arguments don’t carry the day against the counterarguments.

More Here