Posted on 07/01/2022 4:39:11 AM PDT by marktwain
The decision only strikes down the New York Sullivan law, especially the "good cause" provision.
The meat, though is in the process Clarence Thomas and the decision set up on how to decide what is protected, and what is not.
All kinds of carry was protected at the ratification in 1791, both open and concealed. But by 1868, after the Barron decision where the Supreme Court ruled the Bill of Rights did not apply to the states, a few states were banning concealed carry.
Therefore, a case can be made that concealed carry may be banned if open carry is allowed, when the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in 1868. I think it is a weak case, but it can be made.
There is still much restoration of the right to keep and bear arms to come. The court is reluctant to make big jumps.
I am working on an article about the right to be armed while traveling.
Many laws restricting carry made exceptions for when people were traveling. The current system, where states ban people who are traveling (from other states) from carrying, concealed or openly, would never have been accepted in either 1791 or 1868.
I have yet to read the entire decision, Justice Thomas is a genius.
He cuts through all the liberal arguments and displays LOGIC. Pure logic, in the simplest fashion, so even a 12 year old should be able to understand it.
Love that man, wish there were eight more like him. As good as some others are or have been, he seems unique.
A Quiet Summer,,,
.
Would be nice.
“keep and BEAR arms shall not be infringed” — not even a smidgen of wiggle room there.
pretty much covers any place outside the home.
= = =
What is the defn of ‘home’ for a homeless person?
In some cases it is their park bench.
Maybe for them, home is a 6 foot circle centered around them.
So when the Founders wrote the Second Amendment they intended for everybody to own two guns ; a handgun for concealed carry and a long gun for Militia duty?
I don’t think so.
Some early Militia statutes REQUIRED that males who are subject to Militia duty supply themselves with a long gun.
The subject is covered pretty well in the Federalist Papers.
I suggest you read them. There’s no better way to discern the intent of the Founders than to read their own words.
L
What does this mean for US citizens traveling to nearby states, such as if I cross the nearby California border? Am I now allowed to carry—and is it my or their choice of open or concealed? I am still a US citizen afforded constitutional rights when I am in California, I think.
If one lives on their boat and are always traveling. Or lives in a RV. Their boat or RV is their home. If you’re in Florida your ok. If your in New York or Maryland you’re subject to arrest.
This was not addressed, directly in the decision.
However, the historical record is clear. American citizens have the right to be armed while traveling in the United States.
It is up to a future court decision to enforce that right.
I suggest you read them. There’s no better way to discern the intent of the Founders than to read their own words."
Yes indeed!
Not sure I want to be the one to risk my gun and me in jail to test that in nearby California.
Bookmarking
I don’t think NY allows any kind of “carry” for self-defense without permission from The State.
No it isn’t NYs option. It is enumerated at the federal level of a God given right and as such preempts and overrules state and local laws
No it isn’t NYs option. It is enumerated at the federal level of a God given right and as such preempts and overrules state and local laws
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.