Ban 225/45/18 untuk accord
Miller as a proper restriction to weapons that are in common use for lawful purposes. Scalia acknowledged that there might be some limitations on the type of weapon that could fit within this right, referring to U.S. He took readers on a lengthy tour of interpretations of the Second Amendment through the following centuries, finding that both the legal academy and legislators agreed with his perspective. Scalia pointed out that state constitutions crafted similar provisions near the same time as the Second Amendment, and the Amendment's drafting history includes several proposals from the states that would have expressly protected the individual right to bear arms. He analyzed the structure of the document, especially the prefatory clause, as well as its history. Keeping guns unloaded and disassembled also was impermissible because it hindered individuals in exercising the right of self-defense.Įmphatically ruling that the Second Amendment protects the individual right to possess arms and use them for self-defense inside the home, Scalia found that it extended well beyond the traditional meaning of militias. The court defined handguns as arms within the meaning of the Second Amendment and held that the Amendment extends to rights beyond participating in the militia. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the dismissal, finding that Heller had standing. While their case was dismissed by the federal district court, the D.C. The six plaintiffs sought an injunction against the enforcement of this provision, as well as another provision of the law that required any guns to be kept unloaded and disassembled.
![ban 225/45/18 untuk accord ban 225/45/18 untuk accord](https://img.rnudah.com/grids/42/4253943806.jpg)
The District of Columbia had enacted the Firearms Control Regulations Act in 1975, which prohibited individual ownership of handguns in most cases except those possessed by current or former law enforcement officers. They dropped out of the case in the early stages. This meant that he had standing to sue, whereas the others did not.
![ban 225/45/18 untuk accord ban 225/45/18 untuk accord](https://lzd-img-global.slatic.net/g/p/e7d5139b66be5f4dc9bee5f390bffaa3.jpg)
The critical difference between Heller and the other plaintiffs was that he had applied for a handgun permit and been refused. Like the other plaintiffs, he lived in an area with high drug use and crime activity. The named plaintiff, Dick Heller, was a licensed special police officer for the District of Columbia who was not allowed to have a gun at home despite being able to use it at work. The group included a range of age groups, an even balance in genders, and two African-Americans. In a rather artificially generated lawsuit, Robert Levy at the Cato Institute selected six plaintiffs for a claim that would test the individual right to bear arms under the Second Amendment.