Posted on 03/24/2021 4:25:14 PM PDT by bitt
The majority of an 11-judge en banc Ninth Circuit panel concluded that the Second Amendment does not guarantee the right to carry firearms outside the home.
SAN FRANCISCO (CN) — Americans have no right to carry guns in public, a divided en banc Ninth Circuit panel ruled Wednesday, reversing a prior Ninth Circuit decision that struck down a Hawaii firearm restriction as unconstitutional.
“There is no right to carry arms openly in public; nor is any such right within the scope of the Second Amendment,” U.S. Circuit Judge Jay Bybee, a George W. Bush appointee, wrote for the majority of an 11-judge panel in a 127-page opinion.
Looking back on 700 years of legal history dating back to 14th century England, seven judges in the majority found “overwhelming evidence” that the law has never given people “an unfettered right to carry weapons in public spaces.”
The seven-judge majority traced legal texts and laws back to 1348 when the English parliament enacted the statute of Northampton, which banned carrying weapons in fairs or markets or before the King’s justices. It also cited multiple laws from colonial and pre-Civil War America in which states and colonies restricted the possession of weapons in public places.
“The Second Amendment did not contradict the fundamental principle that the government assumes primary responsibility for defending persons who enter our public spaces,” Bybee wrote. “The states do not violate the Second Amendment by asserting their longstanding English and American rights to prohibit certain weapons from entering those public spaces as means of providing ‘domestic tranquility’ and forestalling ‘domestic violence.’”
Writing for the dissent, Senior U.S. Circuit Judge Diarmuid O’Scannlain, a Ronald Reagan appointee, said the majority failed to properly interpret the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2008 decision in District of Columba v. Heller, which overturned Washington D.C.’s
(Excerpt) Read more at courthousenews.com ...
p
“Stand back, everybody. We’re gonna do some infringing. And we’re going to do just as much infringing as we feel like doing. Because there’s nothing that says we can’t infringe.”
Bulcrap argument
700 years ago most english folks were serfs without virtually any rights at all
Well, Heck!
Just how in Tarnation do they think I am supposed to carry my guns down to the cop shop for turn-in?
Appeal to the CONSERVATIVE Supreme court!!!!!!
The most consistent pointmof englis law is that the people have had to demand and fight the elites for every single right they have, because both english and colonists never got their rights any other way from the english.
The history of england is denying common people rigts, taking away what little rights they have, of the elites love of serfdom, and the people fighting against royalty for every square inch of freedom and rights they demanded be acknowledged and protected.
Their own peoples, the scots, welsh, the irish, the colonists.
Now these incredible dunces try this crap logic.
The rogue regime that usurped the election has no right tell us to do or not to do anything. Their “rulings” , “executive orders” and “laws” are illegitimate and unconstitutional.
Neither does the hostile regime have the right to RE-WRITE the Constitution.
2nd Amendment: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
From dictionary, definition of “bear”:
FORMAL•LITERARY
(of a person) carry (someone or something).
“he was bearing a tray of brimming glasses”
Federalist No. 28 excerpt:
If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state. In a single state, if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair.ML/NJ
Voting is no longer a constitutional right either, THEY don’t like the outcome THEY just change it!!!
There are far to many Dem gun owners they better tread lightly!!!
Going back into the precedent in England eh?
Didn’t we fight a revolution to overthrow our English Masters in 1776 and construct a Bill of Rights that ensured we would not be be made into subjects again?
Poor thinking by the Judges, as one reason the 2nd Amendment is to be interpreted as is, is because the writers were well aware of what the English had in their laws.
They rejected
Bushworld strikes again. They damage this guy created lingers like Herpes.
1 : to carry or possess arms
9th circus court, as per usual
Get it?
I have absolutely no confidence the Robert's Court is going to right this travesty of justice. I hope I'm proven wrong.
The George W. Bush appointee judge who wrote the opinion had a son who committed suicide with a gun in 2013. See link above. Sounds like a real unbiased opinion.
Don't be so sure it's that Conservative
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.