The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms

Second Amendment, U.S. Constitution

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 Supreme Court is back from spring/summer vacation. Among the many interesting cases that it should review this fall is Parker v. District of Columbia, an appeal of a lower court ruling striking down Washington, D.C.’s ban on handguns.

The District of Columbia’s city council began banning handguns in 1976 and today bans ALL functional firearms. The lawsuit brought by six D.C. residents overturned the ban on appeal as a violation of the Second Amendment’s “right of the people to keep and bear arms.”

D.C., of course, is not a state. It is part of the federal government. The Constitution expressly grants to the U.S. Congress plenary legislative power over all matters whatsoever in the Nation's Capital. It is hard to see how a Second Amendment that binds the Congress would not apply to the District.

This is the first time the Supreme Court will be revisiting the Second Amendment since 1939. The Court has the opportunity to finally answer the central question: Does the right to keep and bear arms belong to us as individuals, or does the Constitution merely recognize the collective right of states to arm the members of their militias?

What do you think? Should your city council be able to restrict you from keeping a handgun, loaded or empty, in your home for the protection of yourself and loved ones?

Or do gun bans work, decrease violent crime, and this should override any consideration for individual rights?