The D.C. gun ban legislation prohibits residents from keeping handguns inside their homes and requires that lawfully registered guns, such as shotguns, be locked and unloaded when kept at home. The law was appealed by gun ownership advocates and defenders of the U.S. Constitution and the Appeals Court found the law unconstitutional.

Defenders of the U.S. Constitution believe that the legislation violates the Second Amendment.
The Second Amendment says that “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

The Appeals Court decision was appealed to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case. Insiders believe that the Supreme Court Justices will decide against the D.C. gun ban law in favor of individual rights. McCain has gone on record that he does not think the law complies with the Second Amendment. Approximately 300 members of Congress have gone on record that they believe the D.C. gun ban is unconstitutional and urge the Supreme Court to overturn the legislation.

The issue is to the States right to make “reasonable provisions for gun ownership”. The problem with this interpretation is that it’s a strategy for weakening or chipping away at a long standing right. Consider a nice granite stone with legislation that the stone cannot be taken away. If a group of people want the stone removed, the stone can be chipped away gradually until it isn’t much of a stone. This is the strategy used by groups that want to take away the right of the Second Amendment. They will chip away at it until it’s not much of a right.

It’s ironic that the Second Amendment is being challenged in the District of Columbia, the Capital City of the United States. This wll be a historic case. The ruling will have a dramatic impact on the interpretation of the Second Amendment for years to come.

Popularity: 23% [?]