On June 26, 2008 the United States Supreme Court handed down a landmark decision upholding an individual’s right to own and use firearms for lawful purposes, such as for self defense in the home. The decision in District of Columbia v. Heller 554 U.S. ___ (2008) is the first ruling on the 2nd amendment in nearly 70 years, and the first ruling by the Supreme Court to uphold a citizen’s individual right to keep and bear arms. While the decision ruled that the ban of handguns in Washington, D.C. is unconstitutional, it stresses that certain regulations are legitimate. In addition to limiting the type of firearms that can be owned, the decision also upholds prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and laws imposing conditions on the commercial sale of firearms.
I repeat, the District of Columbia v. Heller was "the first ruling by the Supreme Court to uphold a citizen’s individual right to keep and bear arms."
What do you think that means? Do you think it means this was the first time the Supreme Court upheld a citizen's individual right to keep and bear arms? I think that's what it means. And I think that's a direct contradiction to what some of our pro-gun commenters have been telling me. What do you think?