US court to rule on the right to bear arms | NEWS.com.au
Personally i am for this. As much as I don't mind going done to the rifle range and firing off a few rounds, i do fail the need for any one to own a firearm unless they require it for a proffessional reason.
Personally i am getting sicken with the number of times we see another Columbine or Virginia Tech type shooting in the news.
US court to rule on the right to bear arms
THE highest court in the United States is set to issue a ruling for the first time in seven decades on the highly emotional issue of the constitutional right to bear arms.
- US Supreme Court to rule on right to bear arms
- Decision will be first of its kind for seven decades
- Expected to have major impact on US gun control
The US Supreme Court's decision - on whether the right to keep and bear arms is fundamentally an individual or collective right - is expected to have a far-reaching impact on US gun control laws, experts say.
The high court has never before issued a ruling on the interpretation of the second amendment to the constitution, which states: "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."
At the centre of the case is the nation's capital city, Washington DC, which has some of the toughest gun control laws in the country.
Private possession of handguns is strictly banned there, and any rifles or shotguns kept in homes must be disassembled or kept under a trigger lock.
Washington DC government officials say the ban, instituted in 1976, is necessary to keep street violence and murder rates down, and that the second amendment protects gun rights for people associated with militias, not individuals.
"I'm confident in our case, and our continued ability to protect residents from gun violence," mayor Adrian Fenty said when he filed his legal team's brief in March.
Lawyers for the plaintiffs in the case, District of Columbia vs Heller, first argued in 2003 that the DC gun ban violates the citizens' second amendment rights.
Alan Gura, the lead attorney for the plaintiff, questioned the anti-crime impact of the city's laws, saying they have "accomplished nothing except to prevent law-abiding citizens from exercising their constitutional right to keep and bear arms".
Interest in the case, originally brought by a federal building guard who carries a handgun on duty and wanted to keep it in his home for self-defence, has been steadily building, as evidenced by the rash of "friend of the court" submissions to the judges filed on both sides of the argument.
Supporters of gun rights include groups as varied as Pink Pistols and Gays and Lesbians for Individual Liberty, Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, 126 Women State Legislatures, and the powerful gun lobby, the National Rifle Association.
The Supreme Court last took up the issue in 1939, but its ruling on a case involving alleged bank robbers and registration of certain firearms did not directly address the question of the individual versus collective right to bear arms.
Personally i am for this. As much as I don't mind going done to the rifle range and firing off a few rounds, i do fail the need for any one to own a firearm unless they require it for a proffessional reason.
Personally i am getting sicken with the number of times we see another Columbine or Virginia Tech type shooting in the news.