Just saw this re: Peruta
http://www.thetrutha...firearm-public/
Edited by ming, 09 June 2016 - 10:02 AM.
Posted 09 June 2016 - 09:58 AM
Just saw this re: Peruta
http://www.thetrutha...firearm-public/
Edited by ming, 09 June 2016 - 10:02 AM.
NRA Life Member
NRA Certified Pistol and PPITH Instructor
NRA Range Safety Officer
ISRA Member
Registered Illinois Concealed Carry Firearms Instructor
Posted 09 June 2016 - 10:01 AM
So they say the 2nd MAY let you carry an openly exposed firearm, but not a concealed one ? That's the most ridiculous distinction I have ever heard of in my life.
Surly if the intent was to allow people to carry arms in public it doesn't matter if an article of clothing covers it or not in order to exercise that right.
But as a wise man once said, freedom is only secure in the hands of the people. The courts are not and have never been intended to protect our freedoms. They are just as bad as the politicians.
"Living in Chicago, it used to be, 'don't go out at night,' or 'be more careful at night'. Now it's turned into a place where it doesn't matter if it's day or night." - John Hendricks.
Posted 09 June 2016 - 10:16 AM
Well then.
Posted 09 June 2016 - 10:32 AM
Posted 09 June 2016 - 11:13 AM
This creates a circuit split doesn't it? That should trigger the SCOTUS to review this. I don't know if that is a good or a bad thing though.
Posted 09 June 2016 - 11:13 AM
Posted 09 June 2016 - 11:30 AM
Posted 09 June 2016 - 11:25 AM
The CA9 states the open carry question has not been answered by SCOTUS. But in the absence of such implicit open carry opinion by SCOTUS, Heller and McDonald both would require a strict scrutiny examination. With concealed carry removed by CA9 as a protected right, open would be the only option available to exercise the right.
"We must, indeed, all hang together, or most assuredly we shall all hang separately."
-- Benjamin Franklin, 1776
Life Member NRA, ISRA, CCRKBA, GOA, & SAF
Posted 09 June 2016 - 11:27 AM
This is not good. If this ruling is challenged at the Supreme Court level it will be a tie at best and that would let the lower court ruling stand.
Which one? there is a split!
"We must, indeed, all hang together, or most assuredly we shall all hang separately."
-- Benjamin Franklin, 1776
Life Member NRA, ISRA, CCRKBA, GOA, & SAF
Posted 09 June 2016 - 11:35 AM
So how does this matter to us? How will it screw us over? California is already screwed, seems like they're just more screwed now.
Posted 09 June 2016 - 11:48 AM
Here's an article from the Yale Law Journal which gives some historical precedent regarding the Supreme Court and their rulings on concealed vs open carry.
A bit lengthy, but worth the read... and the title of the article should give you a clue about the precedent.
Open Carry for All: Heller and our Nineteenth-Century Second Amendment
** Illinois Carry - Supporting Member
** National Association for Gun Rights - Frontline Defender
** Illinois State Rifle Association - 3 year Member
** National Rifle Association - Patron Life Member
Posted 09 June 2016 - 11:44 AM
Posted 09 June 2016 - 12:19 PM
So how does this matter to us? How will it screw us over? California is already screwed, seems like they're just more screwed now.
In debates, I believe I've heard people reference California and NY, as a model state for gun laws.
Posted 09 June 2016 - 12:46 PM
This basically means you had better well vote from Trump no matter how much you don't like him, because if Hillary wins we are completely screwed on 2nd amendment cases for the foreseeable future.
.
Edited by vezpa, 09 June 2016 - 01:17 PM.
Laws that forbid the carrying of arms disarm only those
who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.
- Thomas Jefferson
Posted 09 June 2016 - 12:52 PM
This basically means you had better well vote from Trump no matter how much you don't like him because if Hillary wins we are completely screwed on 2nd amendment cases for the foreseeable future.
.
The notion here makes me sick.
Posted 09 June 2016 - 12:48 PM
Not trying to be political, but...
Now more than ever, we need to do everything possible to make sure that Hilary is NOT the next president. SCOTUS will probably not accept/rule on the case until there is a ninth judge appointed. The next president will appoint a minimum of one justice and possibly as many as 3 or 4.
Trump may not be your favorite as a candidate, but his stance on the 2nd amendment is strong and his possible appointments are accepted conservatives.
Gfw
The Constitution is the Constitution. Our rights are not granted through it, they are protected by it.
Posted 09 June 2016 - 12:55 PM
Posted 09 June 2016 - 12:58 PM
You may openly carry the flintlock pistol of your choice.
Posted 09 June 2016 - 01:31 PM
You may openly carry the nerf pistol of your choice.
Force and intimidation are the tools of tyrants. - Ron Paul
If Democrats quit shooting people, "gun violence" would go down by 80%.......
Taxation is theft
"Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny" - Thomas Jefferson
Posted 09 June 2016 - 01:30 PM
Anyone know how the total of CC in California?
Posted 09 June 2016 - 01:31 PM
Not trying to be political, but...
Now more than ever, we need to do everything possible to make sure that Hilary is NOT the next president. SCOTUS will probably not accept/rule on the case until there is a ninth judge appointed. The next president will appoint a minimum of one justice and possibly as many as 3 or 4.
Trump may not be your favorite as a candidate, but his stance on the 2nd amendment is strong and his possible appointments are accepted conservatives.
Agreed,... we may not be voting for the President of our choice but we will be voting for the Supreme Court Justices come November and that may be more important.
Posted 09 June 2016 - 01:32 PM
Interesting that the court would cite an edict by Edward I of England (1296). Now there was a leader who put interests of the common folk first l)
Posted 09 June 2016 - 01:54 PM
And we have gun owners who think Hillary should get to appoint the next round of justices.Heller was decided by one vote and we now have one less justice.
Posted 09 June 2016 - 02:08 PM
You may openly carry the flintlock pistol of your choice.
Yes, but may not be loaded, you can have your powder and ball in a separate case.
“Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.”
― Benjamin Franklin
"The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Posted 09 June 2016 - 02:15 PM
Posted 09 June 2016 - 02:31 PM
This is the start of their final battle. They want this to go to the SCOTUS, where Hillary's picks will decide your rights, or lack thereof.
Another active supporter of The Walmart Thread. <- click here to view.
An Indiana resident with a life-time carry permit!
Boomer Sooner
Posted 09 June 2016 - 02:31 PM
This basically means you had better well vote from Trump no matter how much you don't like him, because if Hillary wins we are completely screwed on 2nd amendment cases for the foreseeable future.
.
You took the words right out of my mouth!!! We all have to vote for Trump in November if you care about your 2A. Now more than ever the time has come to all vote as 1 body.
Illinois Carry Supporting Member
NRA Endowment-Life Member
ISRA Member
Posted 09 June 2016 - 02:38 PM
you got that rightNot trying to be political, but...
Now more than ever, we need to do everything possible to make sure that Hilary is NOT the next president. SCOTUS will probably not accept/rule on the case until there is a ninth judge appointed. The next president will appoint a minimum of one justice and possibly as many as 3 or 4.
Trump may not be your favorite as a candidate, but his stance on the 2nd amendment is strong and his possible appointments are accepted conservatives.
Posted 09 June 2016 - 02:48 PM
From the court opinion summary:
The en banc court affirmed the district courts’ judgments and held that there is no Second Amendment right for members of the general public to carry concealed firearms in public.
Prima facie, I'd have to agree with this. There is no "Second Amendment right" to keep and bear arms. This is a pre-existing right, one that isn't established by the Second Amendment.
The Second Amendment merely says that the government can't infringe on this pre-existing right.
Edited by kwc, 09 June 2016 - 02:51 PM.
Posted 09 June 2016 - 02:55 PM
Remember "united we stand divided we fall". If we do not vote for Trump and let the liberal media convince us on the lies and slander we all lose and another anti gun nut will continue to ruin this country. Anyone thinking who cares its just California this will be the start of other states trying the same seeing how Cali got away with it.
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users