9th Court of Appeals - "No constitutional right to concealed carry"

NBC ^ | June 9,2016

[Da Bilge Troll]

Thanks for the reply. That helps a lot.

But still, the court did not rule that concealed carry is illegal, only that it is not required. Correct?

[unread]

"What area does the 9th cover?"

Fairyland......

[Elderberry]

They've been trying to take away our gun rights for a long long time.

According to historian Saul Cornell, states passed some of the first gun control laws, beginning with Kentucky's law to "curb the practice of carrying concealed weapons in 1813." There was opposition and, as a result, the individual right interpretation of the Second Amendment began and grew in direct response to these early gun control laws, in keeping with this new "pervasive spirit of individualism." As noted by Cornell, "Ironically, the first gun control movement helped give birth to the first self-conscious gun rights ideology built around a constitutional right of individual self-defense.

[TauntedTiger]

In a sane world, onerous discretionary gun permits would be for felons on probation. The rest of us have the full rights and responsibilities of the 2A.

[ExSoldier]

I'm not terribly worried. Even among themselves, the lawyers know this one is likely to get overturned: 9th Circuit now second most reversed court

[CedarDave]

But still, the court did not rule that concealed carry is illegal, only that it is not required. Correct?

The way the 2nd amendment works (or should work), the right to keep and bear arms automatically allows concealed carry (subject to certain common-sense checks, not a felon or insane for example). What California did, and the Federal court concurred in, is that you have to prove you have a need to carry and the decision is completely up to the local sheriff. It's as if the you were arrested for a crime and instead of the presumption of innocence, you were already presumed guilty until you prove your innocence. The court has turned the 2nd amendment on its head.

[CedarDave]

Not with the current 4-4 Supreme court (if no agreement, the 9th appeals court decision stands) and certainly not if Hillary is elected and appoints one or more new justices. The Heller decision that affirmed the individual right of citizens to keep and bear arms was a 5-4 decision and a Obama/Hillary court court easily ignore precedent overturn it.

[NKP_Vet]

Will mean nothing in Washington State, which also has open carry.

http://q13fox.com/2016/06/09/court-people-have-no-right-to-carry-concealed-weapons-in-public/

[proud American in Canada]

The Ninth Circuit strikes again...

I wish Justice Scalia were around to set them right.

[proud American in Canada]

I read that Arizona wants to get out of the Ninth Circuit.

[proud American in Canada]

Good for Trump. Anyone who cares about the 2nd. Amendment will be crawling over broken glass to get to a polling place.

You'd better believe it.

[proud American in Canada]

Aim small, miss small...

[Sam Gamgee]

Well, they coach it all in legalize thinking we are too stupid to realize they just made it up.

[ExSoldier]

Obviously, you're right in all those assertions. I stand corrected. But with the happy assumption that Trump is elected, then I think it's highly likely that a Scalia replacement that is appropriate to the stature of the man and his Constitutional acumen, then this atrocity will be overturned.