Pet Forum

The US Supreme Court decision on the Washington DC gun ban law (District of Columbia v. Heller) is a win for the Second Amendment. For those of us that enjoy our constitutional rights, today's declaration that the ban on handguns in DC is unconstitutional, as it is not allowed under the 2ns Amendment, is about as good as it gets. It always amazes me how quickly so many want to give up our rights in the U.S. It's also refreshing to have our Supreme Court Justices side with the intent of the Constitution.

To place this DC gun ban law into proper perspective, here is the Second Amendment itself:

"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."


Of course liberals would have you believe that the 2nd Amendment only applies to the military's right to bear arms, but that's just not the case. As the NRA points out, our country was founded upon a suspicion of big government, and each of us has a duty to arm ourselves to defend the Constitution.

Here is a short story about the DC Supreme Court gun ban case:

In its first ruling in 70 years on the meaning of the Second Amendment, the Court decided that the Constitution guarantees an individual right to bear arms and is not merely a protection of state militias.

The District of Columbia's ban on handguns is history because the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to possess firearms and because throughout much of our history, "the American people have considered the handgun to be the quintessential self-defense weapon...," Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia writes today in an exhaustive and scathing defense of gun rights. "A complete prohibition of their use is invalid."

Scalia points out that some gun restrictions are acceptable, but that a complete ban is unconstitutional: "The Constitution leaves the District of Columbia a variety of tools for combating that problem [gun crime], including some measures regulating handguns," Scalia writes. "But what is not debatable is that it is not the role of this Court to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct."

"There seems to us no doubt, on the basis of both text and history, that the Second Amendment conferred an individual right to keep and bear arms," Scalia writes.