
In 1976, Washington, DC passed a law banning handguns. In 2003 , Richard Heller, a security guard, and others, sued the District of Columbia after it rejected his application to buy a handgun for home protection.
"Make no mistake about it, this is a public safety case," D.C. Mayor Adrian Fenty said. "The reason the city council enacted the gun ban in the 1970s because crime was getting out of control and guns were the cause of a disproportionate number of fatalities. When the gun ban became law, violent crime dropped significantly in the city and has steadily gone down since then."
The District of Columbia law not only bans ownership of handguns, but requires other guns like rifles and shotguns that may legally be kept in the home to be disassembled or kept under a trigger lock.
The case has been appealed to the Supreme Court. The court decided to hear the case and is expected to make a decision in June. The Supreme Court has not heard a case on the 2nd Amendment since 1939. This case is being called the most important gun case in 70 years.
The Second Amendment reads: “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.”
The good news for gun rights advocates, is that the court seems prepared to rule that the Second Amendment ensures individuals the right to own guns for personal use. The more complicated and unsettled issue, however, is whether the Second Amendment allows government restrictions on firearms use in the name of public safety.
Because none of the justices now on the court have ever confronted a Second Amendment case, any prediction about how the court will rule is little more than pure speculation.
What do you think? Should residents of DC be allowed to have handguns? What about the rates of violent crime?