Read this excerpt from the District of Columbia v. Heller dissenting opinion:

The (Second) Amendment permits government to regulate

the interests that it serves. Thus, irrespective of what

those interests are-whether they do or do not include an

independent interest in self-defense-the majority's view

cannot be correct unless it can show that (Washington,

D. C.'s) regulation is unreasonable or inappropriate in

Second Amendment terms. This the majority cannot do.3

What does the author of this excerpt most likely believe?

A. Individual states may prohibit firearm ownership, but the federal

government cannot.

B. Firearms are a danger to the average citizen and should be

outlawed nationwide.

C. Cities have the right to reasonably limit individual rights to

promote the public interest.

D. The Second Amendment no longer applies to the modern United

States

C. Cities have the right to reasonably limit individual rights to

promote the public interest.

Explanation:

District of Columbia v. Heller, case in which the U.S. Supreme Court on June 26, 2008, held (5–4) that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to possess firearms independent of service in a state militia and to use firearms for traditionally lawful purposes, including self-defense within the home. It was the first Supreme Court case to explore the meaning of the Second Amendment since United States v. Miller (1939).

The dissenting opinion was that that cities have the right to regulate the public use of gun which the masses believed was a neccesity.

bfnfnfnfnfj d dnfnfnfnfnfndn

congress seems to have some powers the states do not have. they can do some pretty big things, they can declare war. and they can lead armies and navies. they also have the power to create a mail delivery system, make foreign treaties, print and borrow money, (both states and congress can do that)and make rules for certain places, i think they said the western states.  

the new government has been a big to growing their country! they are getting new land over west. and they are passing laws which to settle boundary issues.  

although most of this information sounds good for them, bad for us, there are some weaknesses from their plan. the people are still having issues with taxes and trading goods, they also don't have a main leader such as a chief or a president. they also have trouble with currency. the states are printing out so much money the national currency is beginning to be worthless. so things are getting hard to handle over here.  

some of the americans like the new government and think that even if they could ask about changing it they would be ignored. daniel shays got a group of people who hated the new government and decided to attack. this could become either worse or better.

(one-paragraph analysis)  

i think that they may start a war or some sort of big attack to make them change their government. most americans just don't want to discuss it. but i think that daniel man will speak up for them. if they do scare them they will get a better government and be able to deal with their issues better! i think that is what is going to happen next in the u.s., sincerely

lorelei     hope this i had some from the internet u   can report me if u want