Urgullibl

Guys, can we just talk about Rampart?

I would add that an ideal free market implies an informed consumer.

You don't understand the test then. The test is that regulations are Constitutional if they meet two requirements:

1) The regulation is covered by the text of the Constitution
2) Analogous regulations existed during the adoption of the 2A and/or the 14A.

That's all there is to it.

It's as objective a test as they come. Based on the lower courts' reaction to Heller, there was a clear need to limit the interpretative leeway given to them, and this test is specifically tailored to achieve just that.

If you want to see actual reverse-engineered justifications for however a court wanted to rule on this issue, look no further than the Ninth Circuit's application of Heller.

How specifically is requiring evidence of analogous regulations from defined time periods a "Rorschach test"?