In this WaPo article, the Supreme Court case of Columbia v. Heller which determined that people are allowed to carry handguns. This 2008 case overturned the law which banned citizens from owning handheld firearms. The reason for the overturing was because this law was seen as a violation of the constitution, particularly the second amendment. Another reason why the Supreme Court overturned the law was because they felt that handguns are a good source of home defense.
I agree with the Supreme COurt's decision to overturn the law banning handguns. I feel this way because the Constitution allows us to own these weapons. Also, I feel the point about home defense is very important because if someone breaks into your house in the middle of the night, owning a gun is much easier to use to defend yourself then waiting several minutes for the police to arrive.
Matt, someone had an argument handy that this is not a violation of the Second Amendment. What was their argument and how does their interpretation of the Second Amendment differ from the Supreme Court's? The answer to this question is rather interesting and really speaks to how widely clauses in the Constitution can be interpreted.
ReplyDelete