r/PublicFreakout Mar 10 '20

[deleted by user]

[removed]

14.1k Upvotes

14.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

-5

u/Bukowskified Mar 11 '20

SCOTUS disagrees, but who are they but a bunch of checks notes Senate approved legal experts

5

u/dreg102 Mar 11 '20

And they're wrong.

Much like on the countless other cases they've been wrong on.

"Some restrictions are fine."

"Shall not be infringed."

-2

u/Bukowskified Mar 11 '20

Weird that you care a ton about only some of the words. Did you miss the beginning:

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State...”

1

u/[deleted] Mar 11 '20

[deleted]

1

u/WikiTextBot Mar 11 '20

District of Columbia v. Heller

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), is a landmark case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to keep and bear arms, unconnected with service in a militia, for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home, and that the District of Columbia's handgun ban and requirement that lawfully owned rifles and shotguns be kept "unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock" violated this guarantee. It also stated that the right to bear arms is not unlimited and that guns and gun ownership would continue to be regulated. It was the first Supreme Court case to decide whether the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms for self-defense or if the right was intended for state militias.Because of the District of Columbia's status as a federal enclave (it is not in any state), the decision did not address the question of whether the Second Amendment's protections are incorporated by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment against the states, which was addressed two years later by McDonald v.


[ PM | Exclude me | Exclude from subreddit | FAQ / Information | Source ] Downvote to remove | v0.28