The SCOTUS heard arguments yesterday about DC's handgun ban.

A majority of the nine-member high court seemed to support the view that the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protected an individual right to keep and bear arms, rather than a right tied to service in a state militia.

The individual right position was advocated by opponents of the Washington, D.C., law, one of the strictest in the nation. The arguments marked the first time the Supreme Court has taken up the Second Amendment's meaning in nearly 70 years.

The court's ruling, expected by the end of June, could have a far-reaching impact on gun control laws in the United States, which is estimated to have the world's highest civilian gun ownership rate, and could become an issue in the November presidential election.

In reading the actual wording of the 2nd Amendment, do you hold that it preserves an individual right to bear arms or a state's right to form a militia?

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.