Question

In 2008, in District of Columbia v. Heller the Supreme Court struck down provisions of a District of Columbia gun control law that banned handguns and required rifles and shotguns to be kept unloaded and disabled. These provisions were struck down by the court as a violation of the Second Amendment.

The Second Amendment states:
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.

There are often debates over how much, if any, gun control is permissible under the Second Amendment. These debates often revolve around the interpretation of the term “well-regulated Militia” in the Second Amendment.
answer fully all of the following questions:

What do you think is the meaning of the term “well-regulated Militia” in the Second Amendment?  How would your definition affect the legitimacy of the gun control law in the District of Columbia? What evidence influenced the initial ruling and resulted in the appeal?  Do you agree with the Supreme Court that this law is a violation of the Second Amendment, or do you feel that the District of Columbia was justified in its restrictions on firearms? Why?

Answer 1

Well I think it means that you have the right to protect yourself and your property when you have proper military training, as the word militia means military organisation of citizens with limited military training, so in my prospective if you satisfy those criteria you may have your gun else you don’t. Well according to me the District of Columbia was right to making people keeping the gun unloaded and disabled. Well since Heller was the victim that helped in the initial ruling as he was denied the license of firearm. Well I think District of Columbia was right and this wasn’t the violation of anyone’s right, the police is here to take care of crime, you don’t need firearms fully loaded just because the amendment says so, those who justify it with amendment are welcome to show where they got their military training. Loaded gun can cause very dangerous situations, and there are country in the world who bans keeping guns unless you have a license, so for my point of view, the Supreme Court was wrong.