>>I don’t agree. If the Founders had intended to enable the federal government to restrict or regulate concealed carry, they could certainly have said so. At the time of the ratification of the Second Amendment, there was no intention to permit federal regulation of arms whatsoever.
Then, you do agree. I was saying that the 2nd Amendment covers the right to BEAR ARMS. I chose my next words poorly by saying that that means open carry. I meant that it means open or concealed carry, and it is the citizen’s choice.
Well, if you put it that way, sure.
To the extent that our Founders were aware of state laws which can be interpreted as defining the nature of "the right", we might have some problems.
It may turn out very fortunate that the anti-gunners have formed such an antipathy to open carry. It will be much easier to get the courts to mandate unintrusive concealed-carry laws. I really like the term, "Constitutional carry".
It would be nice if the courts recognized that the early reluctance to tolerate concealed-carry was obviously just a social prejudice and that today's reluctance to tolerate open-carry is the same thing. The Constitution should not be interpreted in the light of social prejudices.
I plan to visit Arizona again later this year. Unfortunately, it's likely I won't be able to stay permanently.