The US Supreme Court is hearing the most important gun rights case in nearly 70 years, and their ruling could have an impact on the laws that govern the use and control of guns around the nation.

Lawyers are challenging DC's restrictions on gun ownership designed to cut down on murders and violence, saying the laws infringe on the right of citizens to use weapons for self-defense.

Even though the court's decision on the issue isn't expected until June, it already looks like they're going to rule that we have a constitutional right to keep a gun in our home for self-defence.

Chief Justice John Roberts asked "What is reasonable about a total ban on possession?"

Here's what I want to know...How's it possible that we're still trying to decide whether the right to "keep and bear arms" described in the Constitution, is an individual or a collective right? It's an 18th-century document, we've had a few years to mull it over!

Most people agree that the Constitution secures an individual right to own a weapon, but also that any legislation that take guns away from violent people is a good thing.

Coming up with enforceable legislation that can do so isn't going to be easy, especially if the court doesn't decide on the meaning behind the founding fathers' words--something I fear they will skirt around. Maybe we'll get to it in another 70 years...