The supreme court today finally put right a wrong for the people who live in DC. I would say that places like Chicago and San Francisco are next to see some laws thrown out because of this. On a side note I bet Feinstein had kittens when she heard about this lol!
| Quote: |
Writing for the majority, Justice Antonin Scalia said that an individual right to bear arms is supported by "the historical narrative" both before and after the Second Amendment was adopted.
The Constitution does not permit "the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home," Scalia said. The court also struck down Washington's requirement that firearms be equipped with trigger locks or kept disassembled, but left intact the licensing of guns.
Scalia noted that the handgun is Americans' preferred weapon of self-defense in part because "it can be pointed at a burglar with one hand while the other hand dials the police." |
Source.
The court based it's decision on this:
| Quote: |
The Court based its reasoning on the grounds:
that the operative clause of the Second Amendment that "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms" is controlling and is not curtailed by the prefatory clause that announces a purpose of a "well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State";
that, furthermore, the 'militia' referenced in the prefatory clause "comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense";
that historical material support this interpretation, including "analogous arms-bearings rights in state constitutions" at the time, the drafting history of the Second Amendment, and interpretation of the Second Amendment "by scholars, courts, and legislators" through the late nineteenth century; and
that none of the Supreme Court's precedents forecloses the Court's interpretation, specifically United States v. Cruikshank (1875), Presser v. Illinois (1886), nor United States v. Miller (1939)............... |
Source.
General