`  == New Section?:   ``Post Heller / McDonald Legal Developments``  ? ==  Even though it would temporarily make the article's organizational structure messier, I think that this would be a good new section.  And ``legal`` covers both salient court cases and laws.    Whether one thinks that the impact of these is high or low, I think that both would agree that organizing material this way is useful.  I was going to say ``to show impact or non-impact`` but that would be wrong.  Ideally, it's just the salient developments and object RS analysis, let the facts show / not show what they will.   And as a general update, we should reduce coverage of pre Heller/McDonald lower level court cases to just the most salient ones.    What might be a bit more contentious will be does ``Post Heller/McDonald`` start in 2008 or 2010.   Since Heller wasn't solidly applicable to cases on state and local laws until 6/28/10,   I'm thinking that court case coverage should focus on July 2010 and later, plus cover the District of Columbia situation with the existing coverage pre-2008, and new coverage after 2008. Sincerely,   `