FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from the list.
More 2nd Amendment related articles on FR's Bang List.
Posted on 07/11/2022 4:44:44 AM PDT by marktwain
The United States Supreme Court has defended and restored the bear half of the right to keep and bear arms, in the recent Bruen decision.
Much work remains to be done. It is clear that the people have a right to bear arms outside the home. One of the major purposes is for the defense of self and others.
An area left undefined in Bruen is the right to bear arms in defense of self and others while traveling, particularly while traveling across state lines.
There was no prohibition on carrying arms at the time of ratification in 1791. Carrying arms for defense, while traveling, was common and accepted. Even the strictest colonial restrictions on the bearing of arms, the East New Jersey law, enacted in 1686, had an exception for people who were traveling. The colonial law, which was in effect for about six years, was cited by both sides in the Bruen decision: From P. 6 of amicus curiae briefs on Bruen.
In 1686, East New Jersey enacted a law providing that no person “shall presume privately to wear any pocket pistol, skeines, stilettoes, daggers or dirks, or other unusual or unlawful weapons,” and that “no planter shall ride or go armed with sword, pistol or dagger” except certain officials and “strangers, travelling upon their lawful occasions through this Province, behaving themselves peaceably.”3
An exception noted in the earliest and most extreme of the colonial “bear arms” laws should be given some weight.
As noted by an English traveler in the early Republic, traveling armed was common. From Isaac Weld, TRAVELS THROUGH THE STATES OF NORTH AMERICA 233-34 (2d ed. 1799) (1796, on the roads from Kentucky/Tennessee to and from Philadelphia/ Baltimore:
“the people all travel on horseback, with pistols and swords.”
(Excerpt) Read more at ammoland.com ...
No more than you are missing the 2nd Amendment and the 14th Amendment.
FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from the list.
More 2nd Amendment related articles on FR's Bang List.
Heading to NYC today. As I’ve been feeling more frequently in Biden’s America, I wish I could be packing…
The court just said the 2nd is not a secondary right.
Has the same power as the 1st, 13th or any other.
“Can the federal government tell Texas, for example, what qualifications they must set to get a concealed carry permit?”
No. But they can, and have, told New York, Illinois, and California that they can not refuse to issue permits to law abiding citizens by demanding proof of “special needs” and then arbitrarily denying said permit.
Here in Illinois after the McDonald Decision Illinois instituted a “shall issue” system completely within a year of being ordered to do so by SCOTUS. Being a 2nd Amendment absolutist I don’t like it much. It’s too expensive and keeps poor people from even applying.
But it is fairly and equally applied to all residents of Illinois. Take the classes, pay the fees, pass a background check, and your permit is issued.
Period. No “judgment calls” by local officials are allowed. There is a portion of the law that allows your local Chief of Police to object, but not outright deny the permit. But I’ve never heard of it happening.
The 2nd Amendment is a fundamental Constitutional human right. And when one of those is being denied by a State SCOTUS is well within its powers to strike those laws down. In fact it is their duty to do so.
Can Congress write a law to cover all 50 states with a fair and uniform law concerning concealed carry in all 50 States? Maybe and maybe not. The plain language of the 2nd would be difficult to get around in light of recent SCOTUS decisions on the matter. Heller, McDonald, and Dobbs have made the opinions of the Court plain as day. Then there are the ancillary orders that struck down magazine restrictions and AWBs in 3 or 4 other States.
I understand your concerns about the Feds getting involved. But SCOTUS has ruled mostly correctly on the 2nd in recent years. Now we just need to go after the GCAs of 1934 and 1968 and the Miller decision revisited. There’s a good chance both of them would be struck down and Miller reversed.
That would be my hope, anyway.
L
But one which states can regulate to a degree.
Yes, and in many cities and states the local law is "you can't".
Allowing the federal government to say that every state must honor one state's carry permit also allows the federal government to say what qualifications are required for that permit to begin with.
My DL is valid in every state, yet my state sets the requirements to issue it.
The Federal Government should stay out of it completely.
The Federal Government has a Constitutional duty to protect my rights, including my second amendment right to keep and bear arms. Why do oppose that?
p
This proposal is like the idea in the Dred Scott decision that because people could enslave others and because states had to respect the property rights of citizens of other states, state governments couldn't keep slaves and slavery out of their states. It's a bad and stupid idea that will do a lot to tear the country apart.
Now, apply that to the 1st Amendment and tell me how that would work in Commiefornia ...
But that recognition is not unlimited. Kansas is a rural state and issues restricted licenses at age 14. But a 14 year old with the restricted license can't drive in Illinois for example. If pulled over they can, and probably will be, ticketed.
The Federal Government has a Constitutional duty to protect my rights, including my second amendment right to keep and bear arms.
Nothing in this impairs your right to keep arms in your home state.
Which of your rights under the constitution would tear the country apart if the states have to recognize them?
And that condition is set by Kansas. Not the Federal Government. So your argument fails.
Nothing in this impairs your right to keep arms in your home state.
But I may want to leave my state and travel to another, as is my right as a US citizen. I do not check my Constitutional rights at the state line.
Set by the state, as it should be. Same with these restrictions on gun owners.
John Hammond had the blacksmith in Crown Point NY make
A pistol for him to take in 1849 during the California gold rush. He carried that pistol all the way from NY State, up the Mississippi River. He describes in his book that all the deckboys (kids) on the the riverboat had pistols. He carried that same pistol with him in the Civil War in the N.Y. 5th Cavalry under Custer. I went to that blacksmith’s place when I was a kid, a house away from my grandmother. The book is in the Penfield Museum, Chilson NY.
And honored, by every other state, as it should be. Same as with gun owners.
And any state or local laws are an infringement.
That degree has not been flushed out yet.
Plain text and history points to very few if any restrictions on the federal thus the states.
Shall not be infringed.
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.