Second Amendment: The right to keep and bear arms

The Second Amendment has two parts: a prefatory clause about a "well regulated Militia" and an operative clause protecting "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms." For most of the 20th century its scope was unsettled. Since 2008 the Supreme Court has held it protects an individual right, since 2010 that it binds states and cities, and since 2022 that gun laws are judged by history rather than by balancing tests.

The text

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Source: National Archives transcription Verified1

Clause by clause

• "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State," is a prefatory clause. It announces a purpose but, per Heller, doesn't limit the right to militia service.
• "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" is the operative clause. "Keep" means possess; "bear" means carry.

How courts read it

District of Columbia v. Heller (2008). "The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home" (District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)) Verified2. The Court struck down D.C.'s handgun ban. It also listed "presumptively lawful" regulations, including "laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms" Verified2.

McDonald v. Chicago (2010). The Fourteenth Amendment "makes the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms fully applicable to the States" (McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010)) Verified3. Chicago's handgun ban fell. This is the case that makes the amendment a limit on Williams.

New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn. v. Bruen (2022). The Court rejected the "two-step" approach lower courts had used. Now the government must "demonstrate that the regulation is consistent with the Nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation" (New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn. v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (2022)) Verified4. New York's rule requiring "proper cause" for a carry license was struck down. The Court also warned that a city can't be declared a "sensitive place" just because it's crowded: "there is no historical basis for New York to effectively declare the island of Manhattan a 'sensitive place'" Verified4.

United States v. Rahimi (2024). When a court finds someone poses "a credible threat to the physical safety of another, that individual may be temporarily disarmed consistent with the Second Amendment" (United States v. Rahimi, 602 U.S. 680 (2024)) Verified5. The Court said the historical analogue need not be a "dead ringer" or a "historical twin" Verified5.

How it reaches Williams

Through the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause, since McDonald Verified3. A Williams ordinance on firearms must pass the Bruen history test.

There's a second limit, from state law. California has a strong body of state gun law, and state law can preempt city ordinances that conflict with it or that enter a field the state fully occupies (California Article XI, §7) Verified6. Our reading: a small general law city like Williams has little room to make its own gun rules beyond what state law already covers; check the specific Penal Code sections before assuming a city can act.

In Williams

• City buildings. A rule barring guns in City Hall or the council chamber fits Heller's "government buildings" example Verified2.
• Parks and streets. A citywide ban on carrying in all public places would likely fail under Bruen Verified4.
• Discharge rules. Limits on firing guns within city limits are a common safety rule. This site hasn't checked the Williams Municipal Code for one, so don't assume.

Common misconceptions

• "It only protects militias." Heller rejected that Verified2.
• "It only limits the federal government." McDonald applied it to states and cities Verified3.
• "Courts balance public safety against the right." Not since Bruen; the test is history and tradition Verified4.
• "California's constitution protects gun rights too." It has no such clause.

Check yourself

Pick an answer for each question. You will see right away if it is right, and why.