Posted on 10/15/2024 8:09:44 AM PDT by Red Badger
The Supreme Court on Tuesday overturned a lower court ruling from Pennsylvania that allowed residents under 21 to carry firearms in public, though the justices declined for now to hear arguments in the case themselves.
At issue was a state law that barred 18-to-20 years olds from open carrying firearms during declared states of emergencies. The court’s decision tosses a federal appeals court ruling that found the law violated the Second Amendment.
The Supreme Court did not explain its ruling and no dissents were noted.
(Excerpt) Read more at lite.cnn.com ...
2A Ping!......................
incrementalism.
They can choose their gender at 6 years old, but can’t smoke, drink or carry.. Why not?
Bar under 21 from voting, too. That’s just as dangerous, if not more so.
I’d rather see the voting age raised to 21
How can you overturn a ruling and not have an argument on it? It’s one thing if you don’t hear a case and it stays at it’s last state. This is weird that they found nobody to dissent on the ruling?
I’d rather see the voting age raised to 35, same as the president’s requirements................
How about just property owners. The founding fathers had a reason for that
insane
oh well, the USSCt went off the constitution some years ago already
it is basically a corrupted institution that only heightens the contempt for the law so wide-spread in our society
Yes, well, they thought that owning people as property was okay. I’m not down with that.
A vote by someone who thinks they know everything is much more dangerous.
Male property owners only.
I’ve seen a lot of stupid reasons women give for voting including “he’s so cute” “I don’t like his demeanor.” Etc
Fascinating, this would seem to set up a conflict, now a military or police person carrying a gun under the age of 21 during an emergency will be in violation of the law.
Maybe it is time we raise the voting age and draft to 21 and at least try to make it make sense.
However, I don't see how Rahimi has anything to do with this case.
It is a GVR case. Ceritorari was Granted, the judgement Vacated, then the case was Remanded to the lower court.
Very strange stuff going on here.
"The Supreme Court did not explain its ruling [??? emphasis added] and no dissents were noted."
We need a constitutional amendment requiring the compromised Supreme Court to publicly reference constitutional clauses that reasonably justify any decision within 24 hours, "punting" decisions accepted as immediate resignation of all justices.
Regarding Supreme Court punt on Pennsylvania gun law, did the Court even consider that the Militia Act of 1792, based on Constitution's Article I, Section 8, Clause 16, required even men approaching 18 years old to supply their own firearms for militia training?
"Article I, Section 8, Clause 16: To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States [emphasis added], reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;"
"... each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of eighteen years [emphasis added], and under the age of forty-five years (except as is herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia, by the Captain or Commanding Officer of the company, within whose bounds such citizen shall reside ..." —Second Militia Act of 1792"
"Militia members were required to equip themselves with a musket [all emphases added] two spare flints, a box able to contain not less than 24 suitable cartridges , bayonet and belt, two spare flints, a box able to contain not less than 24 suitable cartridges, and a knapsack." —Second Militia Act of 1792"
Also, since Congress and likewise renegade states have repeatedly proven that they are enemies of the people imo, it is now up to Democratic and Republican Trump supporters to effectively "impeach and remove" ALL (exceptions?) state and federal lawmakers and executives in November.
In other words, it's up to us Trump supporters to take the first MAJOR step in draining the swamp by supporting hopeful Trump 47 with a new, Constitution-respecting Congress, new state lawmakers too, not only so that he will not be a lame duck president from the first day of his second term, but will support him to quickly finish draining the swamp.
Finally, let's not allow the anti-Trump media try to fade our memories of what we witnessed on July 13.
Down the Memory Hole: Google Hides Autocomplete Suggestions Related to Trump Assassination Attempt (7.28.24)
But 18 yo men can serve in our military to get sent off to war to be shot at and to shoot the enemy but can’t carry a firearm to defend themselves here in this country? Seems there is a skunk involved in this ruling by the Supreme Court.
IIRC, appeals to SCOTUS are first reviewed by whichever justice oversees the originating circuit court; if accepted then the court decides whether to hear the case or not. They may still turn it down without comment. So a lot depends on where the case comes from.
Can they enlist at age 17 in the armed forces and then carry a weapon, like the brave war hero Tim Walz who carried his weapons of war on his shoulder in battle? Or something like that.
SCOTUS aka Supreme Clowns of the US ... I guess that means if folks under 21 are drafted and sent off to fight in a war they will have to carry sling shots.
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.