The city of Chicago has a ban on handguns. The city of Washington D.C. had a similar ban until the U.S. Supreme Court called that law unconstitutional. Now the case McDonald v. City of Chicago will take the issue before the Court of the Land once again–this time deciding if their D.C. ruling applies to states and cities as well.
Nearly anyone you ask knows what the 2nd Amendment is: it guarantees the right to bear arms. Previous Supreme Court decisions suggested this “right” only applied to the federal government, making it okay for states and cities to restrict guns. However, some argue that cities like Chicago should not be able to ban handguns completely.
When the Supreme Court ruled that D.C.’s handgun ban was unconstitutional, it didn’t expand those prior rulings stating that the 2nd Amendment only applied to the federal government. The reason? Washington D.C. is a different sort of locale, governed by the federal government in a way that cities within the 50 states are not.
It was only a matter of time, then, that the Court would be asked to clarify the right to bear arms as it applies to such bans within states and cities across the country. The “McDonald” in McDonald v. City of Chicago is a concerned citizen who believes he should be able to keep a handgun in the home to protect his family and his property.
Currently, there are numerous laws in every state and city in the nation, controlling not only the weapons that we can and cannot own, but how we can use them and where we can take them. These laws were written with public safety in mind. This new court case stands to potentially define where public safety and the 2nd Amendment intersect.
If you are charged with possession of a firearm, unlawful discharge, or any other weapons offense you may feel misjudged. As your attorney, it would be my job to represent your best interest in the courts, whether you are in Cook County or another jurisdiction.
If you need assistance with your gun case, call our attorneys today for a free consultation.