Preview

District of Columbia v. Heller

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1885 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
District of Columbia v. Heller
Mr. Gleeson
American Government
November 29, 2014
District of Colombia v. Heller The District of Columbia had a law banning all handguns. Dick Heller challenged this law in 2008, on the grounds of the Second Amendment. This was the first time that the Supreme Court had regarded what it meant for an individual’s right to possess weapons for private uses, including self-defense. The District of Columbia had banned handguns, making it a place with one of the strictest gun laws. The District of Columbia also had a law that entailed for any long gun to be disassembled, trigger-locked, or kept unloaded. Dick Heller believed that these laws desecrated the Second Amendment and removed his right to be able to defend himself in a time of maltreatment. Heller based his lawsuit on his constitutional right to have and carry arms under the Second Amendment. Dick Heller was a District of Columbia special police officer, who was authorized do carry a handgun while he was on duty. He wished to keep a handgun at home and register for certification in order to keep him and his family safe if an issue ever arose, but the District of Columbia refused. On Second Amendment grounds, Heller filed a lawsuit in the Federal District Court to allow for handguns, the licensing requirement that prohibits the carrying of a firearm in the home without a license, and the trigger-lock requirement of firearms within one’s home to be abolished. His complaint was dismissed in the Federal District Court. 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.” The Second Amendment is divided by the prefatory clause and the operative clause. The prefatory clause states within it, “security of a free state”. A free state consists of a nation or community. Able bodied individuals who are trained and organized have the right to possess arms to resist harm. The operative clause



Cited: "District of Columbia v. Heller (07-290)." District of Columbia v. Heller. LII / Legal Information Institute. Web. 1 Dec. 2014. "DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER." District of Columbia v. Heller. Web. 1 Dec. 2014.

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    -Dick Anthony Heller, washington dc security officer had been granted a license to carry a handgun while on duty providing security at the federal judicial center.…

    • 318 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The court that the case started in was the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. The court system agreed with Heller and said DC was denying him the rights to own a handgun or any other type of firearm in the house for his personal protection for him and his family. The fact that the District of Columbia wanted the firearm to be non functional also…

    • 1356 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    2) Facts: Otis McDonald, a Chicago resident, tried to purchase a handgun for the purpose of protecting his home and body but was denied due to a Chicago city ordinance that banned the possession of personal handguns. McDonald filed suit against the city of Chicago under the claim that the 2nd amendment of the U.S Constitution gave individuals the right to own a handgun, and that the 14th amendment for due process made the 2nd binding to the states. The case of District of Columbia v. Heller was used for precedent in this case. The latter case found the banning of personal handguns for the use of protecting the home unconstitutional, however only in D.C. The case did not apply to every state.…

    • 466 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    He argues that the regulating firearms is against the second amendment. The Supreme Court decided that because of Article 1, Section 8 (the militia clause), that “[i]n the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a [sawed-off] shotgun . . . has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an…

    • 685 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    The case I observed at D.C. Superior Court was, 2016 DVM 1603, US v Dominguez. It was a criminal sentencing hearing on September 11, 2017. However, if someone without previous knowledge of court terminology witnessed this hearing, they would have been confused. A lot of legal terms were used by both counsels and the judge.…

    • 1359 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    John Kasich Pros And Cons

    • 712 Words
    • 3 Pages

    “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” (source 4). The second amendment is most important because it allows the people to intervene if the government is performing tyranny. If we the people were deprived of this right that means that we would be giving up our freedom to fight against…

    • 712 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Armarcion D. Henderson v. The United States of America, 11-9307 (2011) Retrieved from sblog.s3.amaxonaws.com Academic database < http://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/11-9307-Henderson-v.-U.S.-Petition.pdf>…

    • 1224 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    I understand that the District of Columbia would like to prohibit the carrying of firearm because they would not like a shooting to happen. Many shooting have occurred these past years from people opening fire at a crowd of citizens. Hundreds of people have died from gun shootings and I think that the District of Columbia is trying to prevent shootings from happening in their location. I believe that people would be safe when carrying a firearm in case a shooting where to happen or something were to harm them, they could protect not just themselves but others as well. People commit crimes everyday, even if it is prohibited to carry firearms, many people will find a way to get one either to protect themselves or hurt other. The shooting that have happened could not have been predicted. It happened by regular citizens. I want to be able to defend myself so I support the Second Amendment on people being able to “keep and bear…

    • 645 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Law Library of Congress. (2011, April). United States: Gun Ownership and the Supreme Court. Retrieved from…

    • 590 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    v. Heller in 2008, Alan Gura, also represented Otis McDonald in this case, McDonald v. Chicago. He claimed that Chicago's handgun ban fails to allow him to adequately protect himself. Gura litigated that the Second Amendment, in addition to federal jurisdictions, should also be applied against state and local governments. He argued before the Court that, "In 1868, our Nation made a promise to the McDonald family that they and their descendants would henceforth be American citizens, and with American citizenship came the guarantee, enshrined in our Constitution, that no State could make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of American citizenship." James Feldman, lawyer for the City of Chicago, responded by saying, "States and local governments have been the primary focus of firearms regulation in this Country for the last 220 years. Firearms, unlike anything else that is the subject of provision in the Bill of Rights, are designed to injure and kill."…

    • 664 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    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.” This amendment has caused many debates throughout the years due to the different ways in which it could be interpreted. Most federal appeals courts have said that, when read as a whole, this amendment protects only the rights of the militia to bear arms. However, on a decision made on March 8, 2007, the majority focused on the second clause, saying that the amendment protects the rights of individual people to own firearms as well. The decision was made in a federal appeals court in Washington to strike down a gun control law in the District of Columbia that made it impossible for residents to keep handguns in their homes. The court ruled that banning the right to own firearms was a violation of the Second Amendment.…

    • 560 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    2nd Amendment.

    • 1259 Words
    • 6 Pages

    For more than a century, the 2nd Amendment has been at the forefront of political upheaval. Great politicians and lawyers such as, Joseph story, speaking on the preamble of the 2nd amendment, stating that the “true office” of the preamble “is to expound the nature and extent, and application of the powers actually conferred by the constitution, and to substantively create them” § 462 (F.B. Rothman 1991) (1833). What Story meant by this was that the preamble to the constitution only states a general purpose and justifies the exercise of those powers enumerated in the document as a whole. Other more recent opinions have been offered by the likes of Justices Scalia and McReynolds, who firmly hold that the second amendment simply provides the state with the means and right to form and train its own militia.…

    • 1259 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Recently, public debates have been less focused on the safety and wellbeing of our youth and kids. Instead, the debate has been heavily focused on the meaning of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and the proper use of guns by the adults. The Second Amendment reads, "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…

    • 1206 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In my own opinion, I am glad that Heller won I strongly think he should have won. I support the Second Amendment very adamantly. I believe that D.C did not have the right to tell Heller he could not have a permit, it goes against the constitution to tell a person that the rights that our Fore-Fathers gave us no longer applies to our lives and that they have to give up their right to bear arms. A person should be allowed to have the right to keep and bear arms to be able to protect and support their family. Me personally I love to hunt and shoot guns, I do every time I get the chance and I plan to conceal carry when I get older for self-defense purposes. I agree somewhat if the government wants to take our guns away speaking for all of the people who…

    • 680 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Second Amendment Essay

    • 833 Words
    • 4 Pages

    One of the most highly debated amendments of the United States Constitution is the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment has been disputed for hundreds of years on exactly of its exact true meaning. The United States Constitution wrote the Second Amendment as “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."…

    • 833 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays