Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

States can restrict concealed weapons, appeals court says (CA)
CNN ^ | June 9, 2016 | Tal Kopan, CNN

Posted on 06/09/2016 1:35:31 PM PDT by Innovative

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-26 last
To: Innovative

I live in Maine. We have Constitutional Carry; no permit necessary to carry a concealed weapon on your person or in your vehicle.

The same law last year that gave us Constitutional Carry also made switch blades legal as well.

We also have Open Carry.


21 posted on 06/09/2016 3:20:50 PM PDT by july4thfreedomfoundation (The GOPe must be defeated.....the sooner the better.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: relictele
Make that a Constitutional right to bear arms in self-defense, which means in public. The concealed vs. open carry in public issue is exactly what the dissent here zeroed in on.

I agree with the final dissent (by Judge Smith - there were several dissenting opinions) that the case should have been sent back to the trial court for a full trial on the issue. The problem with resolving it now is that the California legislature did not not formally enact a ban on open carry until after the San Diego federal district court in this case had issued its ruling. That means there still isn't a final trial court ruling on the concealed vs. open carry issue, and that is necessary for a final appellate ruling.

I.e., the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals predictably found another way to delay a final US Supreme Court ruling on a Constitutional right to concealed carry.

22 posted on 06/09/2016 3:23:55 PM PDT by Thud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Innovative
simply looking for their 15minutes
23 posted on 06/09/2016 3:52:51 PM PDT by Chode (Stand UP and Be Counted, or line up and be numbered - *DTOM* -w- NO Pity for the LAZY - Luke, 22:36)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Innovative

Dred Scott vs Sanford.
What the SCOTUS thought about gun control in the pre Civil War era.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0060_0393_ZO.html

“It would give to persons of the negro race, who were recognised as citizens in any one State of the Union, the right to enter every other State whenever they pleased,

singly or in companies, without pass or passport, and without obstruction, to sojourn there as long as they pleased, to go where they pleased at every hour of the day or night without molestation, unless they committed some violation of law for which a white man would be punished;
and it would give them the full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs,

and to KEEP AND CARRY ARMS wherever they went.”

So ruled John Taney. No mention of concealed weapons.


24 posted on 06/09/2016 4:18:37 PM PDT by Ruy Dias de Bivar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Innovative

keep and bear....nothing re: (non)concealed. Choice of the owner on HOW to utilize their Right(s). Let alone one that shall not be infringed.


25 posted on 06/09/2016 6:27:03 PM PDT by i_robot73 ("A man chooses. A slave obeys." - Andrew Ryan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: backwoods-engineer

Great books!!


26 posted on 06/09/2016 6:40:14 PM PDT by vortec94
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-26 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson