I live in california and ccw are easy in this part. No criminal record no problem. Not much crime in a small town where the bulge in your pants probably doesn't mean you are excited.............

The Supreme Court is due to hand down their ruling on the D.C. Handgun case within minutes.
The Ruling is HUGE.It is about if The Right is an individual Right or not.
Either way,it is going to cause some big changes.

RULING

The Right to Bear Arms is an INDIVIDUAL RIGHT. !!!! :):):):)

The US Supreme Court decision to be released today in the Washington DC case will impact, either positive or negative, the state laws etc etc

Conceal and Carry (CCW) Laws by State
We have put together a list of carry concealed weapon laws and organized them by state. To begin your search you can click on your state on the map below or click on your state name in the list on either side of the map.


http://carryconcealed.net/index.php

http://carryconcealed.net/legal/

Just released........

Supreme Court strikes down handgun ban in historic ruling
By MarketWatch
Last update: 10:33 a.m. EDT June 26, 2008

SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) -- In a major backing of gun-ownership rights, the U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday struck down a 32-year-old municipal ban on handguns in Washington D.C., according to media reports. The justices, in a 5-4 ruling, cited the Second Amendment in supporting the right to own guns for self-defense and hunting. The court had not conclusively ruled on the Second Amendment since 1791, according to the Associated Press.

yep,
It is about time the courts made a decision in favor of supporting the Constitution, instead of changing it to make a few poeple happy!

I guess I just don't understand.....how do you get to be a Supreme Court Justice and vote against the Second Ammendment to the Constitution?
What were the four judges who voted negatively thinking? .... or better yet, what was the guy who appointed them and those that voted for them thinking?
Jody

Washington (AP) – The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Americans have a right to own guns for self-defense and hunting, the justices’ first major pronouncement on gun rights in U.S. history.

The court’s 5-4 ruling struck down the District of Columbia’s 32-year-old ban on handguns as incompatible with gun rights under the Second Amendment. The decision went further than even the Bush administration wanted, but probably leaves most firearms laws intact.

The court had not conclusively interpreted the Second Amendment since its ratification in 1791. The 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 infringed.”

The basic issue for the justices was whether the amendment protects an individual’s right to own guns no matter what, or whether that right is somehow tied to service in a state militia.

Writing for the majority, Justice Antonin Scalia said that an individual right to bear arms is supported by “the historical narrative” both before and after the Second Amendment was adopted.

The Constitution does not permit “the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home,” Scalia said. The court also struck down Washington’s requirement that firearms be equipped with trigger locks.

In a dissent he summarized from the bench, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that the majority “would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the Framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons.”

He said such evidence “is nowhere to be found.”

Justice Stephen Breyer wrote a separate dissent in which he said, “In my view, there simply is no untouchable constitutional right guaranteed by the Second Amendment to keep loaded handguns in the house in crime-ridden urban areas.”

Joining Scalia were Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas. The other dissenters were Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and David Souter.

The capital’s gun law was among the nation’s strictest.

Dick Anthony Heller, 66, an armed security guard, sued the District after it rejected his application to keep a handgun at his home for protection in the same Capitol Hill neighborhood as the court.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled in Heller’s favor and struck down Washington’s handgun ban, saying the Constitution guarantees Americans the right to own guns and that a total prohibition on handguns is not compatible with that right.

The issue caused a split within the Bush administration. Vice President Dick Cheney supported the appeals court ruling, but others in the administration feared it could lead to the undoing of other gun regulations, including a federal law restricting sales of machine guns. Other laws keep felons from buying guns and provide for an instant background check.

Scalia said nothing in Thursday’s ruling should “cast doubt on long-standing prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons or the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings.”

The law adopted by Washington’s city council in 1976 bars residents from owning handguns unless they had one before the law took effect. Shotguns and rifles may be kept in homes, if they are registered, kept unloaded and either disassembled or equipped with trigger locks.

Opponents of the law have said it prevents residents from defending themselves. The Washington government says no one would be prosecuted for a gun law violation in cases of self-defense.

I have a question......:) evrytime you hear some nonsense in the media they are trying to stuff down our throats that most people favor banning guns however posted on AOL there is a news story that the Supreme cout just voted down DCs handgun ban, in the story there is a survey asking people if they favor this...........................70 something % in favor, nuff said.

The ususal suspects were the dissenters. The one that really screwed up the balance of the court was Stevens, He was a Regan appointe who either had Regan fooled or Regan did not do his homework either way it was huge blunder on Regans part. I am saddened that the vote was that close. If Gore would have won the last election we could very well be seeing mass confiscations of guns at this very moment.

someone said
 

an armed society is a polite society.Supreme court decided--it,s your right--however mrs. pelosi has already rendered her decision that d c can circumvent that ruling,.And, yes, this is the lady that was going to solve our gas problems, and all the other stuff too.Would be nice to see her have to work for a living like the rest of us--and not have that silver spoon.Just looking at data from florida-have guns--homicide rate down 39%,firearm homicide rate down37%,handgun homicide rate, down 41%--compared to national data, homicide rateonly-0.4%,firearm+15%,handgun homicide rate+24%---Will-alabama

The 157 page Supreme Court decision:

http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf

Gun control= hitting what you intended to. How about the supreme court ruling... and four of the libs don't understand the 2nd amendment!!! Jees!

Great ruling by the Supreme Court today. Maybe this will lead to other bans (California assault weapon, .50 cal, detachable mags etc...) being overturned.

I've read this thread with interest.
Most of you who have expressed a preference have cited personal protection as the main reason to carry a handgun. We have a total ban in the UK on handguns...period. I'm not stating a preference either way as I have no personal experience of living anywhere where handguns are permitted.
However, can I ask how many of you have ever had just cause to expose your handgun in the name of self defense?
Aside from the point of principle, do you feel that carrying a handgun genuinely helps reduce violent crime?
Don't burn me here, I'm genuinely interested, coming as I do from somewhere that doesn't allow handguns.

Thanks,
Paul

Paul, the UK law prohibiting hand guns allows for a comparison. Is there a common belief from the citizens, not the politicians, that the law has influenced the downward trend in the UK for all types of crime:

According to the BCS:

In 2005/06 the total number of crimes in England and Wales was around 10,912,000.
Total crime peaked in 1995, and has since fallen by 44%.
In 2005/06 around 23% of the population were the victim of some type of crime.
This has fallen from a high in 1995 of nearly 40% of the population.

http://www.crimestatistics.org.uk/output/page54.asp

Have the public officials, except for those that originated the ban, attributed to the downward trend in crime to the handgun ban or are there other influences ?

I do not recall, excluding the military, does everyone in the UK police force carry a handgun ?

As a starting point, the principle of citizen rights within the context of an orderly society , cannot be removed from the discussion. Once there is a start of restrictions of any type, the next set of restrictions can be implemented with potentially less resistance, even on a gradual basis.

" The Supreme Court on Thursday embraced the long-disputed view that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to own a gun for personal use, ruling 5 to 4 that there is a constitutional right to keep a loaded handgun at home for self-defense.

The landmark ruling overturned the District of Columbia ban on handguns, the strictest gun-control law in the country, and appeared certain to usher in a new round of litigation over gun rights throughout the country.

The court rejected the view that the Second Amendment’s “right of the people to keep and bear arms” applied to gun ownership only in connection with service in the “well regulated militia” to which the amendment refers.

Justice Antonin Scalia’s majority opinion, his most important in his 22 years on the court, said that the justices were “aware of the problem of handgun violence in this country” and “take seriously” the arguments in favor of prohibiting handgun ownership.

“But the enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table,” he said, adding, “It is not the role of this court to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct.”

Justice Scalia’s opinion was signed by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Anthony M. Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr " .

the 2nd amendment
 

What most people seem to overlook is the point that the 2nd amendment was made so we the people could protect ourselves from the government. With this being said why are we in such a hurry to let government make the decisions for individuals? In reality if the court would have judged in favor of DC wouldn't that have been why the 2nd was created in the first place?

Here is a statistic for you:

36,000 violent gun deaths in America.

Of those 36,000 deaths, 12,000 are suicide, 54 were justifiable homicides.. Statitically most of the 24,000 non-suicide deaths were committed by a family member or by a person known by the vicitim. This menatlity of I need a gun to protect myself from some unknown assailaint is rubish and fear mongering. Just ask the 6 dead people killed by a co-worker in Henderson , Kentucky yesterday. I bet they are not happy with the supreme courts decision. I am not for banning guns, but they should a hell of lot harder to secure than going down to my local gun show with $300.

six deaths
 

How many of those six were carrying a weapon?

answer
 

None! they were in a gunfree safe zone!