Preview

District Of Columbia Vs Heller Case Summary

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1356 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
District Of Columbia Vs Heller Case Summary
In the case District of Columbia ( DC ) vs Heller an officer for DC got declined for the permit to have a gun in his home for the year. After this he decided that this was unfair and took it to court. He pointed out that he was a police officer and he carries a firearm with him at all times for the protection of others and himself, but the court denied him the right to have a firearm for the protection of him and his family. The constitutional issue with this case is the fact that it’s how DC wanted gun owners to break down their guns, have a trigger lock on it, and keep the ammo away from the firearm even though the gun is broken down without the trigger lock. 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 …show more content…
Along with this the gun needed to be broke down, have a trigger lock, the ammo needed to be store in one room, while the firearm was stored in another room. DC said this needed to be done with the intent of not to use the firearm even in self defense. This violated the second amendment. Heller did not violate the second amendment rights in this case at all. The second amendment states we have the right to bare arms. The only time we are not allowed to carry a firearm on us is if we are a felon, on government or school properties, or selling firearms illegally. Heller was not doing any of these things. He simply wanted to protect himself and his family just like I would if I were him. He was also an officer, so for his job duties he needed a handgun on him at all times for

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    One of the ways to toll the statute of limitations for legal malpractice actions is that the attorney(s) against whom the claim(s) is alleged serve as counsel for the plaintiff on the same subject matter within which the wrongful act or omission occurred. This would seem to require privity between plaintiff and the attorney(s). However, this is not the case when it comes to trustees who are represented in their capacity as fiduciaries.…

    • 1237 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • 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 issue here is whether a search for weapons without probable cause for an arrest is unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment to the United States. Through the trial the court rejected the prosecution theory that he gun was seized during a lawful…

    • 966 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The article Marbury v. Madison and the Establishment of Judicial Autonomy by William E. Nelson, discusses “. . . a balance between two concepts democracy . . . and the rule of law. . .” (Nelson 240). The court case Marbury v. Madison took place in 1803. This court case is famous for the creation of judicial review; “the doctrine allowing courts to hold acts of Congress unconstitutional” (Nelson 240). During the presidency of Adam, sixteen circuit judges were appointed. Adams secretary of state at this time was Marshall, whom could not “deliver the commission for one of the new justices of the peace . . . William Marbury, before the end of President Adams’s term . . .” (248). Marbury v. Madison was started because Thomas Jefferson’s secretary of state James Madison refused to give William Marbury as well as others their commissions. Because of this act by Madison, Marbury as well as others decided to petition for a writ of mandamus for their commissions. According to Cornell Law School, a writ of mandamus is “an order from a court to an inferior government official ordering the government official to properly fulfill their official duties or correct an abuse of discretion”. The case of Marbury v Madison led to the Judiciary Act of 1801. This…

    • 478 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good 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
  • Good Essays

    District of Columbia took on Heller in the supreme court in 2008(Doherty 8). The case was a close supreme court case, it had a five to four justice decision (Doherty 4). Heller thought that the second amendment should allow anyone to keep a weapon for self defence in a home registered or unregistered, but District of Columbia did not think that. District of Columbia was upset with the results of the case yet Heller was quite pleased with the results of the supreme court decision. The results of the case have not changed since the results in 2008, some believed that if Donald Trump did not get elected the results would be changed by Hillary Clinton and District of Columbia taking on Heller again. The case started when Heller was told by…

    • 611 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good 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
  • Satisfactory Essays

    In March 2008 the second amendment was reviewed by the U.S. Supreme Court in the District of Columbia et al v. Heller case. The court stated that the second amendment allowed people to own guns. They concluded that the District of Columbia’s ban on guns was unconstitutional. The ban made it a crime to have an unregistered gun. The ban also required lawful guns to be stored unloaded and unassembled or have a trigger lock on it. The second amendment has limits though. These bans violate the second amendment.…

    • 368 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Open Carry Pros And Cons

    • 337 Words
    • 2 Pages

    This problem came up only a couple years ago 5 states outlawed the permission to open carry. There was a predicament with the right to open carry. For those who don’t know what open carry is it is where you can carry a firearm outside of your clothing. People were having problem with it because it was scary they said. They thought that because the gun was in the open it promoted violence. These people would call the police because they were sacred that the gun owner would pull his firearm out for no reason and shoot someone. The states gave them pity and outlawed the right to open carry in 5 states.…

    • 337 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    On June 28, 2010, the Supreme Court issued its second major ruling on gun rights in three years, ensuring our federally protected right to keep and bear arms in all 50 states. The ruling states that the right to "keep and bear arms" is incorporated by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and applies to the states. No longer will State or local governments be allowed to ban most Americans from owning most types of handguns. The ruling effectively strikes down Chicago's handgun ban, not unlike the Washington D.C. law that was already ruled to be unconstitutional by the Supreme Court two years ago in D.C. v. Heller. Gun Rights Advocates hailed the decision across the Country as a major victory before the "conservative" majority…

    • 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
  • Better Essays

    In Wilson vs. Arkansas the decision was that, “To prohibit a citizen from wearing or carrying a war arm . . . is an unwarranted restriction upon the constitutional right to keep and bear arms. If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of constitutional privilege” (Wang, Scott). This decision by the Arkansas Court system shows that any law that restrict firearms is unconstitutional. Another decision by the Texas court system concludes the same thing,…

    • 2498 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    The article, "Supreme Court Declines to Hear Case on Concealed Gun Restrictions" is about a case that was declined by the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday. The case, Peruta v. California, argues the good cause requirement in order for residents to be able to applying for a license to carry a concealed weapon infringes on Second Amendment rights. This mean the U.S Supreme Court was presented with a case about the Second Amendment and dismissed the court without hearing it. I believe the U.S Supreme Court should’ve listen to the case and not just this case, but every case. If someone is filing a lawsuit it’s because they was concerned about a certain topic. Therefore, their problem should be solved.…

    • 120 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Gun Control Essay Example

    • 369 Words
    • 2 Pages

    There is a major debate going on in the U.S. on gun control. Should people have the right to carry a concealed weapon or should they only be allowed to have a gun in their home? Another question is if the government were to ban guns would that be doing us law-abiding citizens more harm then good? Or maybe they should only allow guns in the hands of people that have had background checks and our licensed to handle them. [C]itizens in Missouri, North Carolina, and Texas are asking their state legislatures for the ability to defend themselves against violent criminal attack regardless of where the attack takes place”(Swasey 175).…

    • 369 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The court decided that militia does not limit the Second Amendment and that militia should not be limited to those who serve in the military. It protected an individual's right in more traditional lawful parts like using a firearm for self defense. This court case also helped declare Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 as unconstitutional. (oyez.org) Later McDonald v Chicago also set a precedent in 2010 that extended to the states having more protection with gun rights. Both of these cases ruled in favor of protecting our gun rights. (Supreme Court)…

    • 695 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays