Ruling reflects America's ambivalence on guns
From Discourse DB
This is an opinion item.
| Author(s) | USA Today editorial board |
|---|---|
| Source | USA Today |
| Date | June 27, 2008 |
| URL | http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2008/06/our-view-on-t-2.html |
| Quote | "Fortunately, the 5-4 decision to strike down the District of Columbia's tough ban on handgun possession didn't go as far as gun-control advocates had feared or the gun lobby had hoped. The justices agreed that a right to individual ownership doesn't mean that anyone can own any weapon. That leaves in place reasonable restrictions or outright bans on firearms such as machine guns and sawed-off shotguns, and exotic weapons such as surface-to-air missiles."
|
Add or change this opinion item's references
This item argues for the position Supreme Court was correct in its ruling on the topic District of Columbia v. Heller.
