I support the right of Americans to possess handguns as long as they have a permit.

[Danger Mouse]

I don't have one, but I can understand why people would want one to defend their home and loved ones in case of an emergency.
I am not a 'gun lover' or a 'gun nut' but I think Americans should have that right.
There are many DUer's who feel this way, and many who are proponents of having guns. I think it is unfair to categorize all people who own guns or support the right to own guns as 'gun nuts' or whackos. That is all.

[slackmaster]

1. Some states do require permits for handguns

The federal government has no authority to do so.

[Recursion]

3. DC is a special situation

The Federal government ultimately has full executive and legislative authority over the District; the current home rule situation is a statutory setup rather than a Constitutional one. This fact played a large role in the early history of the case.

[colt equalizer]

2. Why do I need a permit when my right to own one is in the US Constitution? NT

[Antinius]

5. here in WA

You don't need a permit to own one, or carry one as long as it is open carry. You need a permit to carry concealed when not on your property, or place of business.

You also do not need to register one.

You can also carry on a college campus. You can carry on a high or elementary school IN YOUR CAR as long as you are picking your kid up, but cannot get out of the car with it.

And it works JUST FINE, thanks ! :)

[safeinOhio]

6. Might be that

"well regulated" part in the constitution.

[jody]

4. You might read very carefully the part of the opinion I quote below.

3. The handgun ban and the trigger-lock requirement (as applied to self-defense) violate the Second Amendment. The District’s total ban on handgun possession in the home amounts to a prohibition on an entire class of “arms” that Americans overwhelmingly choose for the lawful purpose of self-defense. Under any of the standards of scrutiny the Court has applied to enumerated constitutional rights, this prohibition—in the place where the importance of the lawful defense of self, family, and property is most acute—would fail constitutional muster. Similarly, the requirement that any lawful firearm in the home be disassembled or bound by a trigger lock makes it impossible for citizens to use arms for the core lawful purpose of self-defense and is hence unconstitutional. Because Heller conceded at oral argument that the D. C. licensing law is permissible if it is not enforced arbitrarily and capriciously, the Court assumes that a license will satisfy his prayer for relief and does not address the licensing requirement. Assuming he is not disqualified from exercising Second Amendment rights, the District must permit Heller to register his handgun and must issue him a license to carry it in the home. Pp. 56–64.