Which of the following explains the outcome and significance of the district of columbia v. heller case? the supreme court decided in favor of the district of columbia, that existing laws that ban the owning and carrying of handguns are permitted. the supreme court decided in favor of the district of columbia, that the second amendment allows law-abiding u. s. citizens to own and carry handguns. the supreme court decided in favor of heller, that existing laws are permitted under the constitution that ban the owning and carrying of handguns. the supreme court decided in favor of heller, that the second amendment allows law-abiding u. s. citizens to own and carry handguns in the district.

The following explains the outcome and significance of the District of Columbia v. Heller case,

The Supreme Court decided in favor of Heller, that the Second Amendment allows law-abiding U.S. citizens to own and carry handguns in the district.

Explanation: In the 2008 landmark Supreme Court Case The District of Columbia v. Heller, it was found that the Second Amendment allows LAW ABIDING citizens to own and carry handguns in the District of Columbia (Washington, DC). This case found the Firearms Control Regulation Act of 1975 as unconstitutional. The Act of 1975 called for handguns used for home and self defense to be unloaded, disassembled, and/or locked.

answer; (true);

i believe the answer is: returns on investments, no wages

people who belong in upper class society would most likely get there by obtaining multiple source of income, which a certain percentage of ownership for businesses. since most of them are job creator, they would most likely get their money from profit, not wages.