Alright then:
Quote:
In sum, we hold that the District’s ban on handgun
possession in the home violates the Second Amendment,
as does its prohibition against rendering any lawful firearm
in the home operable for the purpose of immediate
self-defense. Assuming that Heller is not disqualified
from the exercise of Second Amendment rights, the District
must permit him to register his handgun and must
issue him a license to carry it in the home.
|
I guess it's all "that",
minus the bag of chips!
So there's a right of immediate self-defense in the home, which was the only requested remedy of the plaintiff. An intentionally narrow request for remedy to extract an ruling loaded with much broader implications. How am I doing? (Hey, I'm just the piano player, waddaya want!)
