This Ping List is for all things pertaining to the 2nd Amendment.
FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from the list.
Posted on 06/26/2017 7:15:55 AM PDT by aMorePerfectUnion
Washington (CNN)The Supreme Court declined Monday to take up two Second Amendment cases for next term. The first case dealt with a San Diego ordinance that required San Diego gun owners to have a good reason to carry a concealed firearm outside the home. The second case concerned two men from Pennsylvania who challenged the scope of a federal law that bans felons and some individuals charged with misdemeanors from possessing firearms.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
I was always told that San Diego was one of the few conservative urban centers in California. Not so much, it seems.
so i n otherwords the SC is allowing a state to violate the second amendment? There ks nothing in the constitution which puts the requirement to ‘show a need’ before one is allowed the right to carry
The high court probably believes it has spoken enough on 2nd amendment issues given Heller. I understand its positioni.
Anche Io, capisco il positioni!
No more, it turned around 2008 with the magic Kenyan I think true conservatives are getting older and the young are scared, embarrassed or no courage to discuss issues knowing they will be shuned or worse if they argue their pov. As opossed to SF where they would be assaulted.
This Ping List is for all things pertaining to the 2nd Amendment.
FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from the list.
That may affect their precious Facebook friends list.
*puke*
The position is not clear enough if other courts are still denying us our rights. Very disappointing they didn’t take this case!
Agree. This is not the time.
Because they know when the majority rule in favor of the 2nd amendment, it would be a difficult precedent to break in the future.
I don’t think it works that way. Every sheriff in the country is now in charge of gun rights interpretation. That’s the way I read it.
Cowards.
This is a common pattern for SCOTUS on RKBA. Let the Circuits do the dirty work, allow the situation to fester for a decade or two, then opine as Scalia did in Heller, basing a decision on what is “commony done” as the constitutional standard. That’s how unconsitutional infringements become settled law.
So for the rest of us who are stuck between all the conflicting courts and rulings and the various states who want to enforce one set or the other, what’s the message the SC has sent here? Do as you please?
The message is Do Not Live In California and Do Not Be A Criminal.
Let’s pass HR 38 for the reciprocity.
It has turned blue in recent years. Add to that, the Sheriff in San Diego leans anti-2nd Amendment. He spent most of his career as a Fed.
The Supreme Court interprets law, and is not in the business of sending messages. It also does not function to accept every case on a given subject—otherwise there would be abortion rulings every year over every nuanced angle.
Heller needs to play out, and a body of law from the circuits developed. But if it makes you feel better, I’ll give the Supremes a call and let them know your frustration and your need to have a message.
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.