In District of Columbia, et al. vs. Heller, Justice Scalia delivered the opinion of the court pointing out the meaning of the second amendment to The United States Constitution as well as citing other areas in The Constitution where “The People” referred to the individual as opposed to a collective or a member of a corporate body.

Washington D.C. allows the Chief of Police to issue 1 year licenses to carry firearms, but outside of that no one was permitted to carry a firearm or even posses one in their home unless it was disabled, dissembled, or locked in a manner that prevented operation. The Supreme Court’s opinion paraphrased that a disabled or disassembled firearm eliminates an individual’s ability to defend themselves or their home and makes the firearm useless, which violates the second amendment to The Constitution.

This matter originated when a Federal Special Policeman (Heller) wanted to register his weapon in his home while off duty. The District of Columbia refused. When he filed a lawsuit in Federal District Court in the District of Columbia, it was dismissed. On appeal, the dismissal was reversed and the Appeals Court ordered that a summary judgment be entered on behalf of Heller.

The United States Supreme Court has upheld the decision of the Appeals Court and has ruled the District of Columbia law unconstitutional.

Opponents of the second amendment granting an individual’s right to keep and bear arms argue that The Constitution meant “The People” as a whole, or as part of an organized militia, such as The United States Army, or United States Army National Guard, however Justice Scalia pointed out in several places in The Constitution as well as in many state constitutions, “The People” refer to the individuals that make up the people, and not a collective whole or corporate body.