On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court has come down on the side of gun rights, ruling that the Second Amendment restrains the government's ability to significantly limit "the right to keep and bear arms."
The justices voted, 5 to 4, handing down a decision that signals that less severe restrictions could survive legal challenges.
The case involves restrictive laws in Chicago and one of its suburbs and the decision orders a federal appeals court to reconsider its ruling upholding the laws. But it left little doubt that the laws would eventually fall.
Dan Malloy, who is running for governor as a Democrat, said the ruling is a mistake and that decisions about gun control should be made locally.
“I am a supporter of the 2nd amendment, and of the rights of sportsmen, hunters and citizens to own firearms,” Malloy said in a statement. “At the same time, local governments have long been the primary arbiter of firearm regulation, especially handguns. There is a reason for that. I don’t believe we should take local government out of the picture when it comes to controlling firearms.”
We asked viewers what they thought.
@tinytims says the decision is constitutional
@TheBrewerscow tweets: "Upholding Constitutional rights is always a good thing"
“It is about time the Courts backed the 2nd Amendment rights of individuals. They did it in D.C. and now Chicago,” Robert Kay wrote on Facebook. “Hopefully Obama's pick for the Courts is denied. She would have voted in favor of the ban. She is way too liberal and changes her views to please people but once elected or confirmed, will go back to her personal beliefs.”
Local
What do you think?
