Just a little bit about the Second Amendment's role in all this. Olivant, who is very well versed in constitutional law, can add as well.

It's interesting that the Heller case in 2008 marked the first time that the Supreme Court found that the Second Amendment provided an individual right to bear arms. The decision struck down D.C.'s ban on handguns and its requirement that lawful firearms in homes have a trigger lock or be disassembled. The majority's 5-4 ruling (which is an example of conservative judicial activism) was narrow in scope in that it recognized that the government has a right to regulate and restrict firearms, and that the ban of handguns was unconstitutional as that class of weapons is commonly used for self defense, which for the first time was viewed as a basis for Second Amendment protection.

It stands that the Second Amendment does not protect an individual right to possess short barreled shot guns or high capacity military assault weapons as they do not fall within the class protected by the Court. There was a case in the 1930s (Miller) that unanimously found that Congress had a right to regulate and prohibit such weapons not in common use, but that case did not recognize an individual right to bear arms outside the prefatory clause of the Amendment. In a sidenote Mr. Miller, who challenged the National Firearms Act in that case, did not live to see the decision as he had been shot to death.

An interesting thing to note is that the NRA leadership opposed Mr. Heller going forward with his suit against D.C. because they did not believe the Court would find an individual right, and would issue an unfavorable decision with precedential value.