TN: Liston Matthews: Is Knoxville's shooting range prohibition unconstitutional?

The City of Chicago has spent many thousands of dollars, including the payment of plaintiff's attorney fees, of their taxpayers' money fighting against the right to keep and bear arms. First there was the McDonald case, in which the Supreme Court affirmed that the right to keep and bear arms applies, not only to Federal enclaves, but to the States and their subdivisions.

Then, they spent more Windy City money (not to worry, it's just the taxpayer's money) litigating the Ezell case. In that case, the city decided that in order to purchase a handgun, a person must have firearms training, yet they banned all commercial ranges within the city.

Why does this matter in Knoxville? It has recently come to my attention that the City of Knoxville bans commercial indoor shooting ranges:

Sec. 19-109 (c). Commercial indoor shooting ranges. Because of the ultra-hazardous nature of the operation of a commercial indoor shooting range, and because of the potential threat to the safety of the citizens of the city from the operation of such activity, it is hereby declared to be an unlawful purpose to operate an indoor commercial shooting range within the city limits.

Will that ban pass constitutional muster?

More Here