So far all we know is outright ban on handguns is unconstitutional, as well as the requirement to keep firearms inoperable. Both DC and Chicago have registration requirements after their bans got overturned. In fact Chicago is still being sued over shooting range ban (they require training for gun ownership), but nothing in terms of registration at the moment. Bottom line - no 2A violation in this case.
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
I was wondering, if they took his weapon and refuse to give it back, how does this not violate the 2nd amendment? The part about "keep" means they can't take it from him, "bear" means to carry it, which if the story is true is exactly why they arrested him and took his weapon. It is a violation of the 2nd, 7th, and my favorite, the 14th.
The answer is to sue them for violating your "Civil Rights" sue the Port, sue the City, sue the County and sue the State. Sue each and every person who participated. They arrested you, took your property, denied you your civil rights. They should have to pay.
If every gun owner sued their city, county, and state , including the individules who did this, and I mean everyone, somewhere a Judge will hear it, and the Anti Gunners will fear the outcome. I say sue them all.
It is not about the cost of the one gun, it is about your "Civil Rights".
Jim