[Bob Leibowitz]

This is a lengthy, balanced view of the historic importance of the decision by the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals (DC), arguably the nation's most influential, affirming that the Second Amendment protects a pre-existing individual right to keep and bear arms.

[calex59]

It sets out classic, historic, academic and precedentual support of its unequivocal finding that the second amendment defines an individual right to keep and bear pistols and rifles in support of self defense and other lawful uses.

The second amendment says nothing about limiting our arms to rifles and pistols. It goes far deeper than that. It is meant to arm us against the government should such need arise, therefore we are not limited to any certain types of arms. Of course I would not expect any modern judge to read the amendment the way it is written.

[Enterprise]

2nd Amendment bump!! The good guys win one!

[Shooter 2.5]

and supported intellectually and financially by the libertarian-leaning CATO institute.

Uh, nope. Financed by Robert Levy who has a connection to the Cato Institute.

[Atlas Sneezed]

The key phrase mentioned in the column:

My favorite line, and the one I predict will be on bumper stickers in the next election:

“The Amendment does not protect “the right of militiamen to keep and bear arms,” but rather “the right of the people.””

[Atlas Sneezed]

The following in my opinion may prove to be the most critical part of the ruling, should it be upheld in this respect, in that it is the basis for overturning various "assault weapon" bans, machine gun bans, etc.

---

The District based its main arguments on two points. First, a ban on some firearms is not a ban on all firearms. The Court gave the argument the attention it deserved:

“The District contends that since it only bans one type of firearm, “residents still have access to hundreds more,” and thus its prohibition does not implicate the Second Amendment because it does not threaten total disarmament. We think that argument frivolous. It could be similarly contended that all firearms may be banned so long as sabers were permitted. Once it is determined—as we have done—that handguns are “Arms” referred to in the Second Amendment, it is not open to the District to ban them. See Kerner, 107 S.E. at 225 (“To exclude all pistols . . . is not a regulation, but a prohibition, of . . . ‘arms’ which the people are entitled to bear.”). Indeed, the pistol is the most preferred firearm in the nation to “keep” and use for protection of one’s home and family.”