Bruce prototype - 2 nd amendment District of Columbia v Heller Summation of the facts The two parties involved are the District of Columbia and a

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: 2 nd amendment District of Columbia v. Heller Summation of the facts: The two parties involved are the District of Columbia and a group of private fire arm owners. The District of Columbia passed a law which said that if an individual wants to own a firearm they must keep it disassembled or trigger locked at all times. A group of private fire arm owners sued saying that the law violated their second amendment right. A federal court in Washington D.C. said that the second amendment only applies to militias. Heller appealed and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia disagreed saying that the second amendment does protect private gun ownership until it was appealed once again and it reached the Supreme Court. Legal Issues: The only legal issue in this case was whether or not the District of Columbia law that regulated guns violated an individual, who is not affiliated with the state militia, second amendment right to bear arms. The amendment says “A well regulated militia, being necessary to amendment right to bear arms....
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 02/05/2012 for the course ENGLISH 101 taught by Professor Mills during the Spring '11 term at CSU Pueblo.

Page1 / 2

Bruce prototype - 2 nd amendment District of Columbia v Heller Summation of the facts The two parties involved are the District of Columbia and a

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online