Question

Which best describes the Supreme Court's 2008 majority opinion on whether the District of Columbia could restrict private possession of firearms?

a. It reaffirmed an individual's right to keep and bear arms, and asserted that any restrictions on gun access were unconstitutional.
b. It reaffirmed an individual's right to keep and bear arms, indicating that the right could be regulated but not denied.
c. It denied an individual's right to keep and bear arms, as long as this only applied within the District of Columbia.
d. The Supreme Court's refusal to hear the case allowed the lower court decision to stand which allowed "any reasonable restriction on firearm possession".

Answer 1

The correct answer is A.

Step-by-step explanation:

The majority opinion of the Supreme Court 2008 decision on the restriction of private firearms was that there was no restrictions on gun access and any possible restriction was against the constitution. Thus, they clearly reaffirmed that every individual has the right to keep and bear firearms.