Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiff’s action alleging that 18 USC section 922(g)(1) and Wis. Stat section 941.29(1m), which prohibited plaintiff from possessing firearm due to his felony mail fraud conviction, were unconstitutional under Second Amendment, even though defendant argued that both statutes were unconstitutional as applied to him, where his felony conviction was for non-violent offense. Dist. Ct. could properly find that both statutes were substantially related to govt.’s important interest in preventing gun violence, and that both statutes could properly disqualify all felons from having firearms, even those individuals committing non-violent felonies, because felons are more likely to abuse firearms. Ct. of Appeals further noted that: (1) prior case law has concluded that section 922(g)(1) does not violate Second Amendment on its face; (2) evidence is inconclusive as to whether individuals committing non-violent felonies historically enjoyed Second Amendment rights; and (3) defendant’s serious mail fraud conviction precluded him from challenging constitutionality of section 922(g)(1) as applied to him.