I assume he'll argue that a) his felony has nothing to do with guns or violence, b) he hasn't been convicted and it's all a democratic political ploy anyway, and c) he needs his gun to protect him from all the judges he's pissed off with his unconstitutional comments.

Not to mention the fact that, oh yeah, that law was never intended to be used against folk like him.

I wonder if he'll also bring up the fact he doesn't really live in his jurisdiction, just owns land there?