The nation's highest court agreed on Tuesday to hear an appeal by the District of Columbia government arguing that the city's 31-year-old law banning private possession of handguns in the US capital should be upheld as constitutional.

The justices said they would review a ruling by the US appeals court in March, which held that an individual American has the right to bear arms under the Constitution's Second Amendment.

The case came about after a resident in Washington - which is plagued by chronic violence in its poorer neighbourhoods - said his constitutional rights were being violated by the city's three-decade-old ban on handguns.

He won his case on appeal in March, but the city has taken its case to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court will hear arguments most likely in March next year, with a ruling expected by the end of June.

The decision could become an issue in next year's presidential elections.

The United States is said to have the world's highest civilian gun ownership rate.

'The Supreme Court's decision in this case will be extremely significant - the most important decision on guns in nearly 70 years and maybe the most important ever regarding the Second Amendment,' said Mr Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.

A ruling against Washington would give gun-rights advocates a long-sought legal victory and raise questions about restrictions on weapons in New York, Chicago and other cities.

The politically powerful National Rifle Association (NRA), which opposes gun control laws, has denounced what it called Washington's 'unconstitutional gun ban'.

Mr Wayne LaPierre, NRA's executive vice-president, predicted the Supreme Court would rule in favour of broad individual gun rights.

The Second Amendment states that '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'.

Washington has interpreted the disputed amendment as saying that there is a collective right for those who are part of a police force or security force to bear arms.

But others argue that the amendment protects an individual's right to keep and carry arms.

To date, the Supreme Court has rarely considered the issue of the right to bear arms.

In the 19th century, it determined that the country's founding fathers meant the amendment to remain the remit of federal laws and left all the states in the union free to draw up their own gun laws.

Then in 1939, the court upheld a law requiring that arms transported from state to state should be registered.

But all states have since formulated their own restrictions, which vary wildly.

Handguns are used in half of the 15,000 murders across the country every year, according to statistics from the Federal Bureau of Investigations.

REUTERS, BLOOMBERG, AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE