August 14, 2018, 08:53:53 PM
 
*
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
 
 
 
Total time logged in: 0 minutes.
 
   Home   Help Login Register  

     
 
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Ninth Circuit Strikes Down CA Law Restricting Concealed Carry  (Read 1317 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
jack1747
Lifetime Member
Global Moderator
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 18425
Location: Virginias Eastern Shore - Pocomoke Sound


Crab'n is a way of life....


WWW
« on: February 14, 2014, 09:06:51 AM »

"In a 2-1 decision issued on February 13th, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled "San Diego County violates the Constitution's Second Amendment by requiring residents to show 'good cause'" before being allowed "to obtain a concealed carry permit."

The court ruled that the right to keep and bear arms is, in and of itself, a sufficient cause for bearing arms for self-defense. Moreover, it is a sufficient cause both inside and outside of one's domicile. "

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/02/13/BREAKING-Ninth-Circuit-Strikes-Down-CA-Law-Restricting-Concealed-Carry  Cool
Logged

"Helping to Moderate the BCA since 2003"
Mikie
Registered User

Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 2130
Location: Kent Island, Md.




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: February 14, 2014, 10:55:04 AM »

Guess the Supreme Court is going to have to make the final determination on this subject. Didn't the local appeals court rule in favor of Maryland's Law on this recently? It's pretty much the same as the CA Law.
Logged
samiam
Member
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 360
Location: Great Egg Harbor basin




Ignore
« Reply #2 on: February 15, 2014, 08:00:00 AM »

Pretty surprising result from the Ninth Circus. Unfortunately, from what I read, the decision was crafted narrowly to apply to the case at hand, and isn't expected to serve as much of a precedent beyond it (in its current form, at least). I agree that Scotus will have the final say, although they are already (and recently) on record as endorsing the rights of states to enact and enforce "reasonable" regulations on firearms ownership and use. Most of the "reasonable" regulations that Scotus appears to support consititute "infringement" by any sane definition of the word. So, while I'm hopeful that this decision will be upheld and directly lead to overturning other laws and regs that infringe RTKBA, I'm not optimistic.

In other news, Wyoming and a consortium of 18 other states have filed a brief to be heard in Drake (et al) v NJ, currently on its way to appeal before the Supreme Court, which seeks to overturn New Jersey's defacto prohibition of concealed carry for "ordinary" citizens. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/02/13/1-states-join-legal-fight-against-new-jersey-concealed-weapons-law/ The petitioning states claim that they are interested parties on the premise that if the NJ prohibition stands, it could lead to Federal regulation that would trump statutory carry privileges in their own jurisdictions. This one could be interesting. My expectation is that Scotus will find the claimed link between the NJ regs and hypothetical Federal law to be tenuous and not confer standing to the petitioners, and on that grounds refuse to hear the petition, but I'd be delighted to be wrong.

Drake is represented by Evan F. Nappen, author of the NJ Gun Law books and vocal advocate of the right to armed self defense. http://www.evannappen.com/ (I bought his book, otherwise have no connection) Nappen is certain to articulate the compelling arguments for broad carry rights. If Scotus hears the petition as part of the case, even if it ultimately rules against Drake, the lamestream media will be forced to cover the case (and Nappen's arguments) more widely than it would like, because of the number of states involved. That isn't satisfactory, but it represents potential progress in moving public opinion, and that may be the best outcome we can expect at this time.

"In a 2-1 decision issued on February 13th, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled "San Diego County violates the Constitution's Second Amendment by requiring residents to show 'good cause'" before being allowed "to obtain a concealed carry permit."

The court ruled that the right to keep and bear arms is, in and of itself, a sufficient cause for bearing arms for self-defense. Moreover, it is a sufficient cause both inside and outside of one's domicile. "

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/02/13/BREAKING-Ninth-Circuit-Strikes-Down-CA-Law-Restricting-Concealed-Carry  Cool
« Last Edit: February 16, 2014, 08:16:56 AM by samiam » Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

 
 
Home
 
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
Simple Audio Video Embedder


Google visited last this page July 15, 2018, 05:23:33 AM