No. The Court specifically said the ruling was not meant to prevent government from enacting reasonable regulations (my words) on gun ownership.
On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 1:38 PM, Gruss wrote: > > Adam wrote: > > Now, how many licensed-to-carry taxpayers have committed handgun crimes > > If we interpret the Constitution to say that *an individual* has the > right to bear arms (and it would be an interpretation since the > Constitution is vague on the topic), why do citizens need a license? > > Shouldn't any citizen be able to "bear arms", any arms, anywhere, anytime? > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;203748912;27390454;j Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:262906 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
