Someone help me out here. I understand that the USSC is an appellate court, that is, they review the findings of a lower court to determine if the decision was ‘correct’. Can anyone clarify what the ‘issue’ was with the lower court’s decision that the USSC will rule on?
In any case, I pray that if the ruling has to do with the individual’s right to be armed, independent of any organized militia, the correct decision be made.
As someone has pointed out in another article, the idea that the government would need to codify your right to carry a weapon while under government service and authority is absurd. They may also have included that you have the right to wear a uniform as well.
On this basis alone, any 2nd grade civics student would realize that the 2nd Amendment secures an individual right to be armed. Period
The appeal is from the Mayor of D.C. The District of Columbia's petition stated that the question presented was:
"Whether the Second Amendment forbids the District of Columbia from banning private possession of handguns while allowing possession of rifles and shotguns."The USSC after reading the petition from respondent Heller framed it as:
"Whether the following provisions, D.C. Code §§ 7-2502.02(a)(4), 22-4504(a), and 7-2507.02, violate the Second Amendment rights of individuals who are not affiliated with any state-regulated militia, but who wish to keep handguns and other firearms for private use in their homes?" ...
In any case, I pray that if the ruling has to do with the individual’s right to be armed, independent of any organized militia, the correct decision be made.
Looks like it so far.
As someone has pointed out in another article, the idea that the government would need to codify your right to carry a weapon while under government service and authority is absurd. They may also have included that you have the right to wear a uniform as well.
On this basis alone, any 2nd grade civics student would realize that the 2nd Amendment secures an individual right to be armed. Period
Preach to the choir much?
LOL
The "idea" was that the second amendment was to prevent the federal government from infringing the individual right of members of a state Militia to keep and bear arms. This was to preserve the ability of states to form a well regulated Militia.