9th circuit rules no right to concealed carry guns

[Wayne]

the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco upheld a California law that requires gun owners to show a good reason before they can get a license to carry a concealed handgun.

"The protection of the Second Amendment — whatever the scope of that protection may be — simply does not extend to the carrying of concealed firearms in public by members of the general public."
Appeals Court Says No Right to Concealed Gun Carry (http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/9th-circuit-court-appeals-says-no-right-concealed-gun-carry-n589041)

Read More

 

[coastal steelheader]

This will get worse, before Obama leaves office he will most likely do an Executive Order to further restrict gun ownership

This is only the beginning

Appeals court rules Americans don't have right to carry concealed guns | Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/06/09/court-no-right-to-carry-concealed-weapons-in-public.html)

 

[captqc]

One word: "California" The real problem with this is that it's a Federal court decision. This isn't over yet.

 

[CamoDeafie]

I don't see the terms "Right to Openly Keep and Openly Bear Arms" in there, I see "Right to Keep and Bear Arms", which means it doesn't matter how you bear your firearms.... in the most inclusive explanation possible... it means you can bear your firearms any way you see fit... And how many states have said just that so far?

 

[clearconscience]

Ok, open carry it is!

 

[Cigarlvr313]

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. Thomas Jefferson

 

[bolus]

9th court covers Oregon as well so Im sure our legislature will use this next season (unless they get voted out) I'm sure they will also be thrilled with all the open carry.

 

[Cigarlvr313]

Does anyone think that at some point 40 million people will get tired of being told how to live their lives by a few judges?
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. Thomas Jefferson

 

[Joe Link]

Did they forget the 'and bear' part?

"The protection of the Second Amendment — whatever the scope of that protection may be — simply does not extend to the carrying of concealed firearms in public by members of the general public."

The court declined to say whether the Constitution protects openly carrying a gun in public. It said that question was not at issue in the case.

Seems by this logic that leaves only the right to open carry or no right to 'bear arms' at all.

 

[nammac]

The words, written on that piece of parchment, need to be taken literally... That's how the founding fathers wrote it and for good reason...

Perhaps the justices of the 9th Circuit need to go read the federalist papers to understand the true meaning...

The courts have very differing opinions regarding our Second Amendment Rights...

Sounds like they want 40M+ permit holders to hit the streets in protest...

 

[clearconscience]

This is what happens when you appoint politicial puppets to positions of power. The laws don't really matter because they will interpret them as they see fit. How it serves their agenda.

 

[clearconscience]

And please let this remind all of you. Don't let your permits expire!!!!

I had a friend that had a concealed carry permit for all 50 states. He was a retired DEA Agent and worked for the govt after retirement. He let it lapse and couldn't get it back.

 

[albin25]

(I hope this isn't getting off-topic)

Here's a question that I have never actually seen addressed
(maybe because it's a stupid question?)

If open carrying, if your weapon becomes covered by a jacket, it becomes concealed, or, even if you are carrying concealed, would/could it still be concealed if you wear a badge/sign/armband/lapel pin, indicating that you have a weapon on you?
In other words, should/could there be a way to open carry without needing to have the actual weapon exposed for all to see (or grab or have a fit over)...
...call it discrete carry?... Virtual open carry?

 

[Cigarlvr313]

Does anyone think that at some point 40 million people will get tired of being told how to live their lives by a few judges?
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. Thomas Jefferson

I'm only quoting our founding fathers, not advocating violence...........lets bet them at the ballot box!

 

[CamoDeafie]

I'm only quoting our founding fathers, not advocating violence...........lets bet them at the ballot box!

Was there not a paper somewhere written by either Hamilton, or Madison, or someone important in these days, that basically stated that if the Ballot box cannot force change, and that the courts are subservient to the government, and not to the people, then it is time for the people to rise up and make new government?

 

[Cigarlvr313]

I hope we are still at the ballot box stage........

 

[CamoDeafie]

I hope we are still at the ballot box stage........

So do I. But I think we are also at the judicial stage as well, what with the same 9th court also saying its our right to buy guns and ammo without conditions imposed on us (other than FFL BG stuff), and with more states affirming legal rights of citizens to carry concealed (Idaho and Kentucky to name two recent states)

 

[Ura-Ki]

Well, well! I can shoot holes it that ruling, the vague language stating that the 2nd may or may not protect a persons right to carry a weapon concealed, and "The protection of the Second Amendment — whatever the scope of that protection may be — simply does not extend to the carrying of concealed firearms in public by members of the general public." Last I checked, there were four (count um-4 sacred words) SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED contained in the 2nd that basically strike down any ruling pertaining to the 2nd! The courts seem to try adding FLUFF to clear and concise language contained both in the 2nd AND the federalist papers. To Wit, any court challenge to the 2nd can only be brought about by a majority vote of CONGRESS OF THESE UNITED STATES!!!

 

[bolus]

Well, well! I can shoot holes it that ruling, the vague language stating that the 2nd may or may not protect a persons right to carry a weapon concealed, and "The protection of the Second Amendment — whatever the scope of that protection may be — simply does not extend to the carrying of concealed firearms in public by members of the general public." Last I checked, there were four (count um-4 sacred words) SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED contained in the 2nd that basically strike down any ruling pertaining to the 2nd! The courts seem to try adding FLUFF to clear and concise language contained both in the 2nd AND the federalist papers. To Wit, any court challenge to the 2nd can only be brought about by a majority vote of CONGRESS OF THESE UNITED STATES!!!

There is a lawyer over on reddit who has followed the case and broke down the round about way they cherry picked cases, including Old English law prior to the constitution, to come to the conclusion that the second does not cover concealed carry. The majority of the judges are appointed by Clinton.

I dont see the point of arguing these cases. There is really no need to even have human judges anymore since they are all corrupt and decide cases based on party requirements. Simply replace the judge with a big letter R or D and count them up

This case probably wont go to the supreme court either since there is a chance of having a liberal majority and since cases are not decided based on law or logic anymore, just party affiliation, there is no hope of decision based in reality.

 

[kilimanjaro]

(I hope this isn't getting off-topic)

Here's a question that I have never actually seen addressed
(maybe because it's a stupid question?)

If open carrying, if your weapon becomes covered by a jacket, it becomes concealed, or, even if you are carrying concealed, would/could it still be concealed if you wear a badge/sign/armband/lapel pin, indicating that you have a weapon on you?
In other words, should/could there be a way to open carry without needing to have the actual weapon exposed for all to see (or grab or have a fit over)...
...call it discrete carry?... Virtual open carry?

View attachment 296614

Yes, there is a way to to carry openly without having your weapon exposed, simply obtain a license from the state and you are good to go. You legally have to indicate only to law enforcement your armed status, you do that by showing them your license when you interact with them.

Or, we could just go straight to a yellow star on an armband or a tattoo on the forearm, that would be just fine.