Bill of Rights article

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/11/20/scotus.handguns/index.html?iref=newssearch

I chose the second amendment, the right to keep arms. The article I found is about a recent ban on handguns in Washington, D.C. The Supreme Court has decided to discuss the matter. I ruling is expected to come by late June, so it will probably be a topic discussed by the 2008 presidential candidates. Some argue that allowing people to have handguns will only increase the amount of violence in D.C., while other say that it is against their constitutional rights to deny them the right to protect themselves. Last year, the city had 137 gun-related murders. An ongoing discussion is how to interpret the amendment: "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 could mean that only state militias are allowed to bear arms, not individual people. You’d think that someone would have made a decision on this by now. I guess the founding fathers didn’t think that we would be using our right to bear arms to kill each other. Because this deals with the constitution, the Supreme Court has to make the decision. This applies to us, too, because if the law changes and no one is allowed to have guns, it will affect everyone. We saw in “Bowling for Columbine” that it’s not hard to get ahold of a gun in this country, and that that can lead to things like school shootings.