MindTheGAP
Active Member
U.S. appeals court: Constitution gives right to carry gun in public
Excerpt:
A federal appeals court ruled on Tuesday that the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment protects a right to openly carry a gun in public for self-defense, rejecting a claim by Hawaii officials that the right only applies to guns kept at home.
The extent of the right to gun ownership protected by the Second Amendment is one of the most hotly contested debates in the United States, where life has been punctuated by a steady stream of mass shootings.
The ruling issued by a three-judge panel on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, based in San Francisco, came a year after the U.S. Supreme Court declined to rule either way on the carrying of guns in public.
Two of the three 9th Circuit judges voted to reverse a decision by the U.S. District Court in Hawaii that state officials did not infringe on the rights of George Young, the plaintiff, in twice denying him a permit to carry a gun outside.
//
So, what do we all think this means in the grand scheme of things? This, coming from the 9th, is a highly, highly unexpected ruling, and I'm curious if the effects will be far-reaching or largely unnoticed / superseded by state laws.
Would love someone more educated on these matters than myself (looking at you, MSI guys) to comment.
Excerpt:
A federal appeals court ruled on Tuesday that the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment protects a right to openly carry a gun in public for self-defense, rejecting a claim by Hawaii officials that the right only applies to guns kept at home.
The extent of the right to gun ownership protected by the Second Amendment is one of the most hotly contested debates in the United States, where life has been punctuated by a steady stream of mass shootings.
The ruling issued by a three-judge panel on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, based in San Francisco, came a year after the U.S. Supreme Court declined to rule either way on the carrying of guns in public.
Two of the three 9th Circuit judges voted to reverse a decision by the U.S. District Court in Hawaii that state officials did not infringe on the rights of George Young, the plaintiff, in twice denying him a permit to carry a gun outside.
//
So, what do we all think this means in the grand scheme of things? This, coming from the 9th, is a highly, highly unexpected ruling, and I'm curious if the effects will be far-reaching or largely unnoticed / superseded by state laws.
Would love someone more educated on these matters than myself (looking at you, MSI guys) to comment.
