D.C is not a city, it is a Federal District.

FLB, thanks for posting those quotes. How else can we keep the government in check if we cannot be armed. We should all have RPG's and battlefield nukes. Then the government would control itself. This is the true reason behind the 2nd amendment as is told by reading the framer's thoughts. I just wish that they would have used better English in writing it.

It is not only a right, but a duty to be armed at all times.

That said, in 1780 it took at least a minute to pack the muzzle loader. That gave you a bit more time to contemplate what you are about to do. Now you can rattle off 12 rounds at the squeeze of a trigger and think about it later if at all.

Technology. Ain't it a b*tch?

I looked at the ruling and found it to be very logical. We have a constitutional right to bear arms. The argument was that it should be restricted to members of a militia. That is BS. However, the ruling does allow communities to put reasonable restrictions on the right to own guns. It has been proven that taking guns away from citizens does not make them safer. If you look at Britain, the ban on guns has resulted in increased gun homicides. The Brits do not feel any safer, and they have a strong low opinion of their police.

Extremist answers result in extreme problems. Reasonable gun regulations can provide protection for citizens, while ensuring that those who wield guns know how to do so properly.

I am also good by the ruling. It confirms my constitutional right to use a firearm to protect myself and my family. I have no problem with reasonable restrictions such as being licensed to carry in public. And I do.

It also means my brother who lives in DC will no longer have to own his guns illegally.

That doesn't matter. It was still selectively denying Constitutional Rights to its citizens. And if it could do it, any city could do it. Chicago is next to challenge their gun laws.

Those gun laws are now unconstitutional.

That is why the lawsuits have been filed.

Now it's only a matter of time before Chicago's ban is overturn. I can't wait for the day that I'm no longer a criminal in my own home. More importantly, after watching King Daly's incoherent ramblings yesterday he might finally go off the deep end once the Chicago ban is overturn.

GFC is smiling over this one!

Right there with you, pal. Nice to see some remnants of the Bill of Rights being preserved...

That said, in 1780 it took at least a minute to pack the muzzle loader. That gave you a bit more time to contemplate what you are about to do. Now you can rattle off 12 rounds at the squeeze of a trigger and think about it later if at all.

Deepv if this is the way that some people think the constitution should be viewed, that we should only be allowed to have single shot rifles and hand guns because that is what they had when it was written, then it must follow that the first amendment means we shouldnt have tv news, or the interent as it
wasnt inventeed yet so we should be reading this boating site from single line type printing presses. imho

i very happy that they made the decision that they did. what really bothers me is that 4 of them MUST have been reading some other countrys consitution because it CRYSTAL clear that our founding fathers wanted EVERYONE to have the right if they so choose to own a gun for self defence....

Any gun without any limits?

rollofire, my point is that the framers had a different mind set on what a fire arm was. No I don't think that. What I do think is that we should have the same arms available to the military so that we can keep the government in check. Right now it isn't in check.

Yep.