Jason McCrory went to Washington, D.C., on Sunday to witness a debate over interpretations of the Second Amendment.

Tuesday, the 23-year-old New Providence resident got to hear some of the Supreme Court justices declare that Americans have the right to own guns.

Not only that, the recent Millersville University graduate witnessed a historical debate that could lead to the most significant interpretation of the Second Amendment since its ratification in 1791.

McCrory and his friend, 21-year-old Dan Mott, were the first in line on Sunday in front of the Supreme Court building.

"It was about 5:30 a.m., and we wanted the best seats available to the public," McCrory said in a phone interview Tuesday afternoon as he returned to Lancaster County.

"Sunday was cold, but someone loaned us blankets. Monday, I didn't realize how sunny it would be, and I got sunburn."

But putting up with the elements was worth it, McCrory said.

"We got the second-best seats available; they were near a pillar, but they were very good," he said.

McCrory, who earned a political science degree with honors, said he supports the Second Amendment, which states, "A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

"I think it's a personal liberty that people have a right to, and I'm interested in the issue for philosophical reasons," he said.

McCrory said when he was 12, he took a hunter-safety course so that he could hunt small game — though he said he's not "exactly an avid hunter."

"But hunting and the Second Amendment issue are completely separate things," McCrory said. "A ban wouldn't affect me directly, though what was said (Tuesday) can affect gun owners in the future."

Tuesday, the nation's high court considered an appeal of an earlier ruling that found Washington's 32-year-old ban on handguns unconstitutional.

Alan Gura, representing a Washington, D.C., resident who challenged ban, said, "It's unreasonable, and it fails any standard of review."

Justice Anthony Kennedy said the Second Amendment gives "a general right to bear arms."

Governments have a right to regulate those firearms, a majority of justices seemed to agree. But there was less agreement on whether Washington's ban on handguns goes too far.

McCrory said the session extended long past the normal one-hour mark, and many justices seemed ready to say that Americans have a "right to keep and bear arms" that goes beyond the amendment's reference to service in a militia.

It is unclear whether the Supreme Court's ruling will be broad in scope and apply to nearly all state and local firearm restrictions.

A federal appeals court had ruled the handgun ban to be unconstitutional. The ruling marked the first time a federal appeals court had found a gun law unconstitutional on Second Amendment grounds.

"I'm glad I got to see it all," he said. "I've seen constitutional cases live before, but this particular case I studied up on. My MU professor, Richard Glenn (head of the college's Government Department), inspired my interest in constitutional proceedings."

McCrory said some may want the ban, relating the Second Amendment to famous violent incidents such as Columbine. "It's easy to appeal to the emotions there," he said. "But often, genocides that have occurred in the 20th century have begun with disarming the people.

"I think the benefits of the Second Amendment outweigh the risks," McCrory said.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

E-mail: cdifonzo@lnpnews.com