support existed for the principle

noted that “why and how” the challenged law burdens the Second Amendment right are “central” considerations in this inquiry. In the context of Section 922(g)(8), the Supreme Court determined that sufficient historical support existed for the principle that “[w]hen an individual poses a clear threat of physical violence to another, the threatening individual may be disarmed” temporarily. In support, the Court pointed to surety laws, which were designed to prevent firearm violence by requiring an individual who posed a credible threat of violence to another to post a surety, and “going armed” laws, which punished individuals สล็อตเว็บตรง