Argument: Banning one class of arms does not violate an individual right to bear arms - Debatepedia

Welcome to Debatepedia! | About | Help | FAQ | Media Kit

Personal tools

	Views Article Discussion Edit History
Search Navigation Debatepedia Home IDEA Home Recent Changes Debate Digest cue Popular debates Newest pages Categories Internships getting started User Guide Create a debate Create an argument Pro/con structure Contact Mailing list Twitter Facebook group interactions Donate! NFL resolution topics Other IDEA projects Useful links National Debate Series: Boston In other languages Toolbox What links here Related changes Upload file Special pages Printable version Permanent link	Debatepedia partners with The People Speak Global Debates and the The National Debate Series: Boston (Nov. 10) Debate Digest Nov 19th: Medical marijuana. Next Debate Digest article: Trying 9/11 terror suspects in NYC courts Argument: Banning one class of arms does not violate an individual right to bear arms From Debatepedia Revision as of 17:10, 1 April 2008; Brooks Lindsay (Talk \| contribs) (diff) ←Older revision \| Current revision \| Newer revision→ (diff) Jump to: navigation, search [Edit] Parent debate Debate:DC handgun ban [Edit] Supporting quotes Oral arguments in DC vs. Heller. March 19th, 2008 - "CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: What is -- what is reasonable about a total ban on possession? MR. DELLINGER: What is reasonable about a total ban on possession is that it's a ban only an the possession of one kind of weapon, of handguns, that's been considered especially -- especially dangerous." Retrieved from "http://wiki.idebate.org/en/index.php/Argument:_Banning_one_class_of_arms_does_not_violate_an_individual_right_to_bear_arms"

Problem with the site?

.