Mr. Nichols, as much as I support your goal, I feel I'd be speaking for the majority by stating that your interpretation of this and other decisions is a stretch. By this, I mean your readings of many decisions appear far more cut and dry than the courts have presented, and presumably intended, them.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
And yet my readings of all of the decisions is based on what the court actually said whereas the readings of others is that the court meant the exact opposite of what it said. Take for example the decisions in Baldwin, Heller and McDonald. It is impossible to understand them to say that Open Carry can be banned in favor of concealed carry or that there is a general right to concealed carry under the Second Amendment and yet there are those who do. No doubt, you are one of them.
This decision, Norman v. State, is the only decision which holds that Open Carry can be banned in favor of concealed carry.
And once again, we have another concealed carry cert petition citing Moore with no claim by the petitioner that Moore stands for the proposition that states can ban Open Carry in favor of concealed carry and no explanation by those here who cling to the fantasy that it does as to why if this were true, none of the so called gun-rights lawyers have put forth their interpretation of Moore in their cert petitions?
The inability of others to be able to read a court decision or a brief does not constitute a problem on my part.