District of Columbia v. Heller: The Use and Permit of Handguns

1529 Words 7 Pages
With many recent incidents that involve guns between 2012 and 2013, gun control laws have become a hot topic in America. On one hand, after the horrific incident like the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting at Newtown in 2012, most people wanting to limit guns from getting into the wrong by setting up a rigorous system that control who can and cannot obtain a gun. On the other hand, we have the people who believe that with such rigorous system in place is violated the individual rights that granted and protected by the United States Constitution. They believe that the rigorous system will prevent people from defending themselves and could be a violation of their privacy. Regardless of which side is right, if we want to understand more …show more content…
Before the District of Columbia v. Heller, a citizen cannot own guns for self-defend without some form of military background. However, this all change when a special policeman in D.C who was denied permission to register a handgun that he wanted to keep at home. Heller was authorized to be able to carry his hand gun during his duty, but he cannot register for a license to keep a handgun at home. By being denied from owning a gun for self-defense, even with gun training like the military have, it encored him to take his case to the court and it soon ends up made it to the U.S. Supreme Court (Carter 234). While it sounds strange that an important issue that dealt with the Second Amendment has only come up recently since it first enact in 1791. However, prior to the Heller case the Supreme Court had only dealt with Second Amendment claims on only four times. These cases are old and they did not address the issue of the right to bear arms (233).
The main argument that help Heller win his case is the Second Amendment of the U.S Constitution. The Second Amendment of the U.S Constitution stated that “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.” Since it was written in the 1791 the court finds the meaning behind is outdated. The
Open Document