The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the total gun ban in D.C. is unconstitutional.
The court's 5-4 ruling struck down the District of Columbia's ban on handguns and imperiled similar prohibitions in other cities, Chicago and San Francisco among them. Federal gun restrictions, however, were expected to remain largely intact.
The court had not conclusively interpreted the Second Amendment since its ratification in 1791. The 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 basic issue for the justices was whether the amendment protects an individual's right to own guns no matter what, or whether that right is somehow tied to service in a state militia, a once-vital, now-archaic grouping of citizens. That's been the heart of the gun control debate for decades.
The answer: Writing for the majority, Justice Antonin Scalia said that an individual right to bear arms exists and is supported by "the historical narrative" both before and after the Second Amendment was adopted.
La Shawn Barber is celebrating:
Woo-hoo! Ding, dong, the ban-witch is dead!
I’m happy to announce that today, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that the District of Columbia’s ban on handguns is unconstitutional. (Source) Individuals have a right to bear arms, so says the court, and this DC resident is about to start bearing, baby!
You go, La Shawn! And all the other DC residents who can go out and get a gun now.
This is great news, and it highlights how important our choice of president will be. The next president will be nominating Supreme Court Justices. We will either get liberal, activist justices who believe in legislating from the bench and looking at international law for inspiration, or we will get justices who believe in checking the Constitution to see what it actually says before making decisions.
Choose wisely when you vote.