FEMALE VOICE: Welcome back. The nation's top court rules that Chicago's handgun ban violates the US Constitution. It does not mean, though, that you can go out and buy a weapon today. But what does it mean?

MALE VOICE: Our legal analyst, former Cook County state's attorney Thomas Glasgow joins us this morning. Welcome back to you, sir. Good to see you.

THOMAS GLASGOW: Good to see you.

MALE VOICE: First of all, what did the Supreme Court say? And how does it really, really affect the Chicago law?

THOMAS GLASGOW: What the Supreme Court said was that the 2nd Amendment as applied to the 14th Amendment applies to states, not just the federal government. And therefore, the right to bear arms and to protect oneself in the home is a guaranteed right under the Constitution that the state may not make laws to infringe upon in any way, shape, or form. So the Chicago complete ban, which is one of the toughest in the nation, that's been in effect for the past 30 years, is now not going to withstand the Court's ruling. It has not been struck down yet. But it is not going to withstand the ruling. And it probably will be ruled unconstitutional by the 7th Circuit.

FEMALE VOICE: So in the meantime, is that what they mean? In the meantime, the ban is still in effect until that official decision comes from the appeals court.

THOMAS GLASGOW: It's still in effect. It's probably unenforceable. But it's still in effect. So the city of Chicago's made it very clear that they're going to be making arrests for these sort of things. If you've got a handgun in your home, then obviously you're not going to be allowed to have that. And they are going to be prosecuting you based upon that under the old city ordinance.

MALE VOICE: So you already talked about restructuring ordinance, new ordinances, and stuff.

THOMAS GLASGOW: Right.

MALE VOICE: They're trying to accomplish the same thing. What can the city put in place that would hold up do you think?

THOMAS GLASGOW: Probably very much like what DC did. The Heller case, which was the case before this, is the Washington DC case. And in that case, they ended up putting restrictions on certain handgun, such as you had to have it fired for ballistics tests so that they can see the lands and the grooves. When a bullet comes out, it makes a certain fingerprint on that bullet. And then you can trace the bullet to that certain gun. Having people have insurance, making people register, making people take classes, these are all things that are perfectly acceptable and probably will withstand constitutional muster, based upon the language in both Heller and in the McDonald case that we just heard about.

FEMALE VOICE: And, Thomas, we're curious. You know, what have you heard from people that you know in the law enforcement business. How is this going to affect them?

THOMAS GLASGOW: Well, this only extends to having a firearm within your home. The Supreme Court was very, very clear on self defense is a legally recognized defense in all 50 states. And therefore, you're not going to be allowed to take that gun out in your car. You're not going to be allowed to conceal carry. You're not going to be allowed to walk the streets. This is only within the confines of your home. People in law enforcement, of course, are concerned that when they come and knock on the door that someone's going to have a gun and they injure themselves. But this is really no different than, you know, the suburbs that have had guns legally for years. And there really have not been a rash of incidents for this sort of thing. So the fear is probably unfounded.

MALE VOICE: So - - said they're going to go after whatever the city does in terms of ordinance. I know we're out of time. But got to get your reaction to the Birds [phonetic] conviction.

THOMAS GLASGOW: I honestly am not surprised from, you know, the accounts that we have talked about. When he testified, he did not come off very well in front of the jury. He story seemed to shift. And I think, as any practitioner can tell you, once you get someone on the stand who does not testify well, the jury does not believe them. And it rests upon their shoulders. You really can't win those cases when your guy does not come off very well in front of the jury. And a credibility issue ensues.

MALE VOICE: That was key, wasn't it?

THOMAS GLASGOW: It was.

MALE VOICE: All right.

FEMALE VOICE: Yeah.

MALE VOICE: Look forward to talking to you next time.

FEMALE VOICE: Yeah, thank you, Thomas.

THOMAS GLASGOW: Thank you very much. It's good to see you.

FEMALE VOICE: Seems like so much legal stuff is going on in the city right now. Thank you for joining us.

THOMAS GLASGOW: Never a shortage.

FEMALE VOICE: Yeah, I know. Clearing it up for us for a little bit. Right now, we're going to take a break and check weather and traffic for you, heading out to Will--