What was the main conclusion of the Supreme Court's 2008 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller and 2010 decision in McDonald v. Chicago?

Citizens are allowed to own guns for legitimate purposes, such as protecting the home.

Explanation:

District of Columbia v. Heller was the case in which Heller who was the D. C. applied for the licensing of a handgun to keep at home which was denied by the District of Columbia. The case of District of Columbia v. Heller 2008 was the first case in the Supreme court that stated the individual's right to possess the firearms regardless of being in a state military or not. It was the case

The case of McDonald v. Chicago was similar to the District of Columbia v. Heller. In this case, McDonald argued that in Heller's case, the court permitted to keep the firearms on the grounds of the Second Amendment.

In both cases, the Supreme Court allowed the citizens to keep the firearms in their homes for safety purposes on the grounds of the Second Amendment that states one's right for self-defense.

answer; /// i believe the correct answer is (b) disposition

a would be the answer