Posted on 02/13/2014 2:27:31 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Via Gabe Malor, who’s already found the tastiest chestnuts in the opinion. The novelty here isn’t the ruling itself but the court issuing it. It’s the Ninth Circuit, which has jurisdiction over the west coast and typically leans left thanks to liberal all-stars like Stephen Reinhardt. (He wasn’t part of the panel that heard this one, thankfully.) With today’s ruling, the Ninth joins the Seventh in holding that the Second Amendment, just as it says, includes a right to “bear” arms. States can regulate that right but they can’t ban it altogether. Three other federal appellate courts have ruled the other way, all but guaranteeing that SCOTUS will end up deciding this sooner rather than later. Memo to the Court’s conservatives: Grant cert ASAP, please, before Obama gets another appointment.
The particular statute at issue here was San Diego’s law banning concealed carry. The only way to get a permit there is to show a “unique risk of harm.” Wanting to carry a gun for self-defense without showing a special need isn’t good enough. The Supreme Court’s Heller ruling six years ago already guaranteed the right to possess a gun at home, so the question today was whether limiting carry to one’s own household is a permissible state regulation of the right to bear arms or an impermissible outright prohibition. Given the text of the Amendment, says the Ninth Circuit, the answer is obvious:
If, as the Supremes found in Heller, the Second Amendment is ultimately a right of self-defense then it’s goofy to think that the right can be limited to one’s own home. If anything, the ability to defend yourself is more urgent when you’re not protected by four walls. A little more from the majority’s conclusion:
You can ban open carry or you can ban concealed carry but you can’t ban carry entirely without completely depriving people of their right to “bear.”
Here’s the opinion. A history lesson on America’s long jurisprudential tradition of defending the right to carry begins on page 23; brush up for the next time someone on the left insists that these activist conservative courts have gone rogue in defending gun rights. Big question now: Will this ruling survive? It was heard by a three-judge panel, as is custom for appellate cases. But the entire Ninth Circuit can request an “en banc” hearing of 11 judges, a majority of whom might be liberal, to reconsider it. Probably doesn’t matter either way. This issue is headed to the Supreme Court no matter what the Ninth does.
Exit question: Wendy “Open Carry” Davis must be thrilled at the news, no?
Is this satire? Maybe from The Onion? Did pigs fly when the 9th Circuit issued this finding?
I would still point out that the Constitution doesn’t grant me any rights, it only enumerates them. I was born with those rights and I don’t even acknowledge a cour’ts authority to rule on the matter.
They got glasses, or a large-type version of the Constitution.
The same was true in all of the densely-populated counties in CA right up until this morning, and it will still be true for as long as politicians can stall.
Two questions:
1. Did the court give San Diego a deadline to conform?
2. Sooner or later this is going to lead to the issue of how non-residents can carry. Any thoughts on that?
LOL! Just cause it’s in LARGE PRINT don’t improve their comprehension “skills”. Had to be something in the water. Was it a full panel review? Were all the judges represented in the decision/ruling that was handed down? If not, can “someone” appeal it and ask for the full panel to review the decision/ruling?
9th Circuit! can you believe it? perhaps they are tired of having their rulings overturned...
It doesn’t matter to me what the Supreme Political Hack Court says on this issue. I can read and will keep and bear arms.
The catch is that Arms can be effectively eliminated through regulations. And the courts have ruled that the state has the right to Infringe on the right to bear arms by using regulations. Even though “Shall Not be Infringed” is pretty darn clear.
John Semens, your craptire is bilgePissWater compared to real news like this.
The Ninth??? Is this from The Onion?
That is NYC. It is still possible to get a carry permit in NY State (for now):
http://www.nraila.org/gun-laws/state-laws/new-york.aspx
There is a famous image of Eleanor Roosevelt’s carry permit, from 1957, and it was clearly marked “NOT VALID IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK”.
BARF ALERT: Do not go to the location, below, unless you have a strong stomach.
..where well-trained police forces provide personal security... TO THEMSELVES FIRST. The rest of us.....I guess we’ll receive it if and when they get around to us. Remember, ‘Protect and Serve’is just a motto.
We used to take rifles and shotguns to school
Was pretty common in the 50s. We’d see long guns and pistols in holsters being carried and worn by high school kids leaving school or walking down a road on their way to a friendly ranch or a nearby canyon. This was in Monterey, California.
The only interest was from a friendly police officer who wanted to check out the various guns the kids had and remind them of gun safety, not to shoot toward the highway or cattle etc.
From the 9th Circuit, will wonders never cease.
This is like a shot between the eyes to gun grabbers.
Bloomberg wept.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
