Posted on 07/24/2018 11:31:54 AM PDT by rexthecat
A federal appeals court ruled on Tuesday that the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment protects a right to openly carry a gun in public for self-defense, rejecting a claim by Hawaii officials that the right only applies to guns kept at home.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
Is this the 9th circuit court ?
> does this mean that anywhere in the Ninth Circuit, including California, I could open carry my handgun, presuming it is legal in California? <
Sure, if you don’t mind some expert sharp shooting California cops who didn’t get the court decision unloading 30-40 rounds in your and fellow Trader Joes shoppers general direction.
Any ruling in the Ninth Circuit applies throughout that circuit. So that’s my question, what is the effect of this ruling? I don’t think I’d be waltzing out of the house this morning here in CA with my Sig strapped to my waist openly. That’s a good way to get myself shot by the cops. It would be nice, as you point out, for the powers that be weigh in on just what it means. Keeping your high cap mags is one thing, openly carrying is quite another matter.
“They must be feeling the heat that the 9th Circuit is potentially going to be broken up into a couple of Circuits dilute their left wing, reversible nonsense.”
More likely it’s the makeup of the three judge panel, just like Peruta. These “leopards in black robes” will not willingly be changing their “spots.” The open question is will there be an “en banc” convened and when? And in the meantime what can people be “allowed’ to do?
> Sure, if you don’t mind some expert sharp shooting California cops... <
Yep. And as Freeper blackdog noted, they can always get you for disturbing the peace. Or for being within 500 yards of a school. Or for being within 500 miles of Jerry Brown.
As the old saying goes...If they want ya, the’ve got ya.
EXCELLENT. Now, let’s get Kavanaugh on the High Court, and enshrine the right to carry NATIONWIDE, which should lead to complete RECIPROCITY of carry permit regardless of the laws of the state of origin.
You must live in a state that does not recognize the Constitution. My sympathies.
In contrast, Alabama is a traditional open carry state.
This is the second or third recent ruling by a Ninth Circuit panel that sided with the Constitution on the 2nd Amendment. Somebody must have substituted their tofurkey with red meat.
No. Cali doesn’t recognize federal law.
It should also cover concealed weapons!
That’s what it says. Good for them. Even they can’t twist the language.
Good thinking.
First I think there is a delay before the court officially issues its ruling. This provides time for the affected parties to file an appeal.
In this case, there will probably be an appeal to have the case re-heard "en banc" by the Ninth Circuit, which means by a panel of nine judges instead of just three.
Assuming such an appeal is made, then there is a delay while the Ninth Circuit judges are polled to determine whether the case will be re-heard. If the Ninth Circuit agrees to re-hear the case, then count on another year or two to get their new, improved decision.
If, after polling the Ninth Circuit, the decision is NOT to re-hear the case, then the losing parties might be afforded a stay of the effect of the ruling pending application to the US Supreme Court. Such a stay might remain in effect until such time as the Supreme Court decides whether or not to take the case.
If the Supreme Court doesn't take the case, then the stay would probably then be lifted. This would no doubt take until at least some time in November after the Supreme Court is back in session after their summer break.
What this all means is that in all likelihood the soonest that Californians might benefit from this ruling might be about the end of November.
The other side of the coin is that the Ninth re-hears and reverses the decision, the Supreme Court refuses to reconsider the case, and Californians have to wait until hell freezes over to win their right to keep and bear arms.
I am not a lawyer. My estimation above is based on my observations of the Peruta case (attempting to win the right to concealed carry) which ended in the "hell freezes over" option.
The three judge panel which just ruled is bound by the precedent set in the Ninth Circuit by the Peruta decision which ruled that there is no right to concealed carry protected by the Second Amendment.
This more recent decision conforms with that decision.
What I find amusing is the realization that the anti-gun liberals will be begging for "shall-issue" concealed carry at such time as open carry is recognized as the protected right to bear arms. I, for one, will open carry EVERYWHERE as a means of coercing anti-gunners into removing their most onerous infringements.
If the anti-gunners want me to conceal my openly-carried firearm the price will include the ability to install a pistol-grip on any of my rifles. I will personally organize others to remove this and other infringements as the price for hiding our weapons. Otherwise, anti-gunners are going to think they are living in Dodge City.
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.