Yesterday, the US Circuit Court of appeals released a ruling stating that the 2nd Amendment is an INDIVIDUAL right.
I just read the entire 75 page ruling.
The opposing side of the argument was the District of Columbia (Washington DC). In almost every page of the decision, the Court slaps DC up side the head.
It is well worth the read:
Here is the one paragraph version (enjoy):
To summarize, we conclude that the Second Amendment
protects an individual right to keep and bear arms. That right
existed prior to the formation of the new government under the
Constitution and was premised on the private use of arms for
activities such as hunting and self-defense, the latter being
understood as resistance to either private lawlessness or the
depredations of a tyrannical government (or a threat from
abroad). In addition, the right to keep and bear arms had the
important and salutary civic purpose of helping to preserve the
citizen militia. The civic purpose was also a political expedient
for the Federalists in the First Congress as it served, in part, to
placate their Antifederalist opponents. The individual right
facilitated militia service by ensuring that citizens would not be
barred from keeping the arms they would need when called forth
for militia duty. Despite the importance of the Second
Amendmentís civic purpose, however, the activities it protects
are not limited to militia service, nor is an individualís
enjoyment of the right contingent upon his or her continued or
intermittent enrollment in the militia.
Out of respect for the lawyers that argued the correct side of this issue, I will abstain from lawyer jokes for one full year.