Page 1 of 1

No Constitutional Right To Concealed Carry

Posted: Thu Jun 09, 2016 2:11 pm
by Burgundy&GoldForever


SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — A federal appeals court says people do not have a right to carry concealed weapons in public under the 2nd Amendment.

An 11-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued the ruling Thursday.

The panel says law enforcement officials can require applicants for a concealed weapons permit to show they are in immediate danger or otherwise have a good reason for a permit beyond self-defense.

The decision overturned a 2014 ruling by a smaller 9th Circuit panel.

Re: No Constitutional Right To Concealed Carry

Posted: Thu Jun 09, 2016 2:17 pm
by Deadskins
How about the fact that, if they were unconcealed, the instances of innocent carriers of these weapons being shot by police would go through the roof.

Re: No Constitutional Right To Concealed Carry

Posted: Thu Jun 09, 2016 2:27 pm
by Burgundy&GoldForever
Deadskins wrote:How about the fact that, if they were unconcealed, the instances of innocent carriers of these weapons being shot by police would go through the roof.


I think what they're saying is that state governments have the right to restrict concealed carry. Without this interpretation of the 2nd Amendment the individual states would have no power to require concealed carry training or permits.

Re: No Constitutional Right To Concealed Carry

Posted: Thu Jun 09, 2016 2:44 pm
by Deadskins
But there would still be no restriction against unconcealed carry, other than self-imposed.

Re: No Constitutional Right To Concealed Carry

Posted: Thu Jun 09, 2016 3:19 pm
by Burgundy&GoldForever
Deadskins wrote:But there would still be no restriction against unconcealed carry, other than self-imposed.


True but that issue was addressed in a SCOTUS ruling in DC v. Heller.

On pp. 54 and 55, the majority opinion, written by conservative bastion Justice Antonin Scalia, states: “Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited…”. It is “…not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.”

“Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.”

“We also recognize another important limitation on the right to keep and carry arms. Miller (an earlier case) said, as we have explained, that the sorts of weapons protected were those “in common use at the time”. We think that limitation is fairly supported by the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of ‘dangerous and unusual weapons.’ ”

The court even recognizes a long-standing judicial precedent “…to consider… prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons.”

Re: No Constitutional Right To Concealed Carry

Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2016 3:01 pm
by TexasCowboy
Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:


SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — A federal appeals court says people do not have a right to carry concealed weapons in public under the 2nd Amendment.

An 11-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued the ruling Thursday.

The panel says law enforcement officials can require applicants for a concealed weapons permit to show they are in immediate danger or otherwise have a good reason for a permit beyond self-defense.

The decision overturned a 2014 ruling by a smaller 9th Circuit panel.


The 2nd amendment wasn't just about the right to carry/bare arms, the founding
fathers wanted an insurance policy that if times ever got bad enough, those with
guns were able to form militias and overthrow corrupt governments in the hope
of preserving peace and democracy

that however is a threat to the way our government thinks today and so our
systematic rights to own weapons is now under tyranny, before we had law
enforcement we took care of our own business, If a man attempted to steal
cattle or commit a crime, He was subject to vigilante justice even if that
meant he was going to be shot and killed for it, Now the state says we
are the only ones justified in taking a life...so if you commit a crime then
we reserve the right to terminate your life as we see fit! the hypocrisy in
all this is quite frightening if you ask me

however changing the laws that essentially nobody is going to follow
will not change the course of gun violence...putting them in jail or the
threat of sentencing them to death doesn't work, So why not let every
one just do what needs to be done, at worst lots of body bags get filled
and then the police can ride around spending more time chewing on their
jelly donuts and talking to their girl friends from their squad cars