Texas-Book-Gun Law Armed And Educated - Flipbook - Page 16
prevailed in court that day. The Court held that individuals have a
right to keep and bear arms.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)
THE FACTS
Heller applied for a handgun ownership permit and was denied;
additionally, D.C. required that all firearms (including rifles and
shotguns) be kept unloaded and disassembled, or bound by a
trigger lock, even in a person’s own home.
THE LEGAL HOLDING
1. The Supreme Court found that the Second Amendment protects
an individual right of firearms ownership for the purpose of
self-defense and is not connected with any militia or military
purposes; it further elaborated that individual self-defense is
“the central component” of the Second Amendment. Further,
handguns are the primary defensive weapon of choice and are
protected by the Second Amendment.
2. A well-regulated militia is not the state’s military force.
3. The Court also discussed what the phrase “bear arms” meant:
“wear, bear, or carry...upon the person or in clothing or in a
pocket, for the purpose...of being armed and ready for offensive
or defensive action in a case of conflict with another person.”
4. The D.C. regulations were held to be unconstitutional.
5. The Court concluded that, like other rights, the right to bear
arms is not completely absolute. Reasonable provisions and
restrictions have been upheld.
Keep in mind D.C. v. Heller was a split 5-4 decision; only one
Justice away from a completely different outcome, where the
Second Amendment (according to the dissent) had “outlived its
usefulness and should be ignored.”
Brief Legal History Of The Right To Bear Arms And The Laws Regulating Firearms | 5
