Replies

Caetano IS more important!

I am not a lawyer, but it seems to me that the Supreme Court’s ruling in Caetano should trump any and all state’s anti-2A laws:

“In a per curiam opinion, the Court held that, although stun guns are unusual in nature and were not common during the enactment of the Second Amendment, they are included in the Second Amendment’s protections. To hold otherwise would be inconsistent with the Supreme Court’s decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, which held that Second Amendment protections extend to arms that were not in existence at the time of the founding.

“Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr. filed a concurring opinion in which he reiterated the importance of access to self-defense and the rights afforded by the Second Amendment. Justice Clarence Thomas joined in the concurring opinion.” (https://www.oyez.org/cases/2015/14-10078)

A “For the People” slam dunk?

In the best of all possible worlds, SCOTUS could, in one fell swoop, negate ALL anti-2A laws!

I am also not a lawyer but the linchpin of Caetano was the technology involved. SCOTUS was silent on the issue of whether or not Ms Caetano had the right to carry outside the home vis-à-vis the 2nd Amendment.

Having worked many years in NYC which is patently hostile to concealed carry (unless you are connected), I would have LOVED for legal acknowledgement of the right to carry in states hostile to freedom. But I must admit, for all those years I was disarmed by the state, I rarely wished for SCOTUS to rule on the 2nd Amendment's guarantee of concealed-carry, or whether or not such a guarantee trumps state law via the 14th Amendment.

Why? Because most states already have very generous (that is, Normal and proper) concealed carry laws today. There are only a handful of states where the citizenry is disarmed outside of their homes....it sucks for them, but do we want to bet the farm for those states? I am NOT confident that SCOTUS would rule correctly and, if we lose in a 5-4 ruling with a ghastly anti-carry opinion written by Roberts, then those states' concealed carry protections MAY be in jeopardy.

I feel for my brethren Deplorables in blue "may issue" states. But I would rather suffer the sporadic injustices of "may issue" statism when there ARE many surrounding states that permit freedom, than gamble and lose at the federal/SCOTUS level.