5/11 scotus briefs

[delaware_export]

Currently, young v Hawaii.

And your argument is kind of circular. Especially where oc is illegal.

You can not legally open carry. The law says so.

So to be legal, you just request a permit which in Peruta was CC. Which WE WILL NOT issue. And don’t have to. There is no way to comply with the law. Unless there is some form of carry other than oc or cc. I am not aware of such.

So cc, as the only legal method, was argued as THE method for a person to carry. As the other was outlawed. Especially in the case of young. And Peruta by the time it got en banc.

I’d bet that if someone tried to argue oc, they’d get the legal double step about standing. “Until you get arrested and charged for oc where cc is denied, you have no standing”

And remember folks get killed by police for selling loose cigarettes in some places, MWAG in Ca nj ny hi etc... that’s gonna work out.

So let’s get someone arrested for oc so we can “have standing” to challenge oc. Or use mr young.

The Peruta en banc consolidated two cases Pertua and Richards. Clement represented Peruta, Gura represented Richards.

https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/media/view_video.php?pk_vid=0000007886

approx 2 min into the argument Clement indicates that this is case is about whether there is some right to carry outside the home, not whether there was a right to CCW.

Given the ban on OC they are essentially asking the court to accept CCW without demonstrating it may actually be part of the right, even though there is a historical prohibition.

I am not aware of any other case that tries to demonstrate that CCW may be part of the right by better explaining the historical prohibition.

Which cases challenged the laws on OC grounds?

 

[jcutonilli]

Norman v state Fl

FL allows CCW so they don't prohibit carry.

 

[jcutonilli]

Currently, young v Hawaii.

And your argument is kind of circular. Especially where oc is illegal.

You can not legally open carry. The law says so.

So to be legal, you just request a permit which in Peruta was CC. Which WE WILL NOT issue. And don’t have to. There is no way to comply with the law. Unless there is some form of carry other than oc or cc. I am not aware of such.

So cc, as the only legal method, was argued as THE method for a person to carry. As the other was outlawed. Especially in the case of young. And Peruta by the time it got en banc.

I’d bet that if someone tried to argue oc, they’d get the legal double step about standing. “Until you get arrested and charged for oc where cc is denied, you have no standing”

And remember folks get killed by police for selling loose cigarettes in some places, MWAG in Ca nj ny hi etc... that’s gonna work out.

So let’s get someone arrested for oc so we can “have standing” to challenge oc. Or use mr young.

My argument is not circular. If OC is illegal there are two options. Challenge the OC prohibition or demonstrate that CCW is really part of the right. Pertua did neither.

You generally do not need to get arrested to have standing. Typically you just need to demonstrate a credible threat of prosecution if you OC. You would need to apply for the permit if you want to demonstrate CCW is part of the right.

Young is challenging the OC prohibition. The case is currently at the en banc court awaiting reply briefs and oral argument.

 

[rambling_one]

Mental gymnastics at its best.

 

[whistlersmother]

Mental gymnastics at its best.

See my signature line.....

 

[press1280]

FL allows CCW so they don't prohibit carry.

You asked : Which cases challenged the laws on OC grounds?

Are you asking which cases challenged on a complete ban?

 

[press1280]

My argument is not circular. If OC is illegal there are two options. Challenge the OC prohibition or demonstrate that CCW is really part of the right. Pertua did neither.

You generally do not need to get arrested to have standing. Typically you just need to demonstrate a credible threat of prosecution if you OC. You would need to apply for the permit if you want to demonstrate CCW is part of the right.

Young is challenging the OC prohibition. The case is currently at the en banc court awaiting reply briefs and oral argument.

But what about the 3 cases that were just denied cert? Those 3 states did not have a different standard between CC and OC.

We've had many of these cases get to SCOTUS now with a ton of briefs in tow. I'm not sure what you're getting at that they've all somehow overlooked.

You mind telling us?

 

[press1280]

Currently, young v Hawaii.

And your argument is kind of circular. Especially where oc is illegal.

You can not legally open carry. The law says so.

So to be legal, you just request a permit which in Peruta was CC. Which WE WILL NOT issue. And don’t have to. There is no way to comply with the law. Unless there is some form of carry other than oc or cc. I am not aware of such.

So cc, as the only legal method, was argued as THE method for a person to carry. As the other was outlawed. Especially in the case of young. And Peruta by the time it got en banc.

I’d bet that if someone tried to argue oc, they’d get the legal double step about standing. “Until you get arrested and charged for oc where cc is denied, you have no standing”

And remember folks get killed by police for selling loose cigarettes in some places, MWAG in Ca nj ny hi etc... that’s gonna work out.

So let’s get someone arrested for oc so we can “have standing” to challenge oc. Or use mr young.

The argument that was used was that CA decided their preferred mode of carry and the plaintiffs merely wanted to "go with the flow" instead of going after the OC law. But of course CA wants to play the shell game and say that CCW can be regulated and given to whoever we see fit but they can also ban OC. Heads we win, tails you lose.

 

[delaware_export]

Yes sir. That was kinda my point.

CA-HI etc: you may not carry a weapon. In any manor. Whatsoever.

And in the case of young, where is wolfwood, they seemed to shell back and forth. Implying you could get the other permit, but they issue neither and make both forms of carry illegal, without a permit...

Which I think they have issued somewhere between 0 and ... less of.

Let’s see how en banc goes in the 9th, unless mr young gets the ‘rona or some other health condition that allows for the case to be muted.

The argument that was used was that CA decided their preferred mode of carry and the plaintiffs merely wanted to "go with the flow" instead of going after the OC law. But of course CA wants to play the shell game and say that CCW can be regulated and given to whoever we see fit but they can also ban OC. Heads we win, tails you lose.

 

[jcutonilli]

You asked : Which cases challenged the laws on OC grounds?

Are you asking which cases challenged on a complete ban?

It is a question about challenges to OC based on states that effectively have a complete ban. It was in response to this post.

Cali, and all the usual culprit states, have effectively outlawed OC. MA NJ CA NY HI and others. So..

According to the 9th, that leaves NO C. Other circuits seem to agree as well.

The cases I am familiar with have challenged the CCW part, but which ones challenged the OC part.

 

[delaware_export]

As I said above, young vs Hawaii.

It is a question about challenges to OC based on states that effectively have a complete ban. It was in response to this post.



The cases I am familiar with have challenged the CCW part, but which ones challenged the OC part.

 

[jcutonilli]

But what about the 3 cases that were just denied cert? Those 3 states did not have a different standard between CC and OC.

We've had many of these cases get to SCOTUS now with a ton of briefs in tow. I'm not sure what you're getting at that they've all somehow overlooked.

You mind telling us?

I believe I have been telling you.

None of them really explain why the lower courts got it wrong and what needs to be corrected. Any case that will impact CC does not address why it should be allowed given the historical prohibition.

They don't address the government's role in providing public safety, nor the public's role in providing it. They don't point out the government relies on Korematsu like evidence that uses the criminality of others to deny rights to law abiding citizens.

 

[jcutonilli]

The argument that was used was that CA decided their preferred mode of carry and the plaintiffs merely wanted to "go with the flow" instead of going after the OC law. But of course CA wants to play the shell game and say that CCW can be regulated and given to whoever we see fit but they can also ban OC. Heads we win, tails you lose.

Peruta never really addressed the issue of OC, which is why Young was decided the way it was. The plaintiffs were only challenging the good and substantial requirement at the local level and failed to challenge the OC law. You need to challenge things appropriately if you hope to win.

 

[jcutonilli]

As I said above, young vs Hawaii.

As I said

Young is challenging the OC prohibition. The case is currently at the en banc court awaiting reply briefs and oral argument.

 

[delaware_export]

Yes, we agree. But you asked once. I answered.

You asked again, I answered. Again.

With Cali saying cc is , by law, denied without a permit. And that permits are required, a permit which can be denied for any reason, or no reason. It would seem that the only C left to discuss, in the eyes of the 9th, is OC

And again, Hawaii, in the 9th and as well as Cali deny OC. Hence a full ban. I know you know this, but reiterating for clarity. And so young.

So when the 9th hears this en banc, will wolfwood remind them they have denied CC? And ask them to address the BIG question. Is ANY carry a right? And if cc isn’t a right, per the 9th, is the right based on OC? If noT CC and not OC, what else is there?

As I said

 

[press1280]

I believe I have been telling you.

None of them really explain why the lower courts got it wrong and what needs to be corrected. Any case that will impact CC does not address why it should be allowed given the historical prohibition.

They don't address the government's role in providing public safety, nor the public's role in providing it. They don't point out the government relies on Korematsu like evidence that uses the criminality of others to deny rights to law abiding citizens.

I’m pretty sure Warren v DC has been included in more than 1 parties briefs to SCOTUS. The government has no duty to protect individuals, so I’m not sure how much more they need to explain this fact. Stats about low crime rates of permit holders, crime rates of may issue vs shall issue have also flooded SCOTUS. It’s also been brought up that may issue began as a Jim Crow law.
So what else is there?

 

[press1280]

It is a question about challenges to OC based on states that effectively have a complete ban. It was in response to this post.



The cases I am familiar with have challenged the CCW part, but which ones challenged the OC part.

What you’re talking about can only be done in a select few places where OC is banned. Young will decide CA and Hawaii. NY could be challenged by someone in a no issue county.
Now there are some cities with their own OC carve outs (like Denver, Philly) where a non resident from a non reciprocal state could mount a challenge.
I think it may be prudent to start going to the state courts instead of the federal courts due to all the bad precedent there.

 

[jcutonilli]

I’m pretty sure Warren v DC has been included in more than 1 parties briefs to SCOTUS. The government has no duty to protect individuals, so I’m not sure how much more they need to explain this fact. Stats about low crime rates of permit holders, crime rates of may issue vs shall issue have also flooded SCOTUS. It’s also been brought up that may issue began as a Jim Crow law.
So what else is there?

If you really want to discuss specifics, why don't you find a case where Warren was discussed, or pick a case you think appropriately addressed why SCOTUS should take the case so we can figure out if it really addressed why SCOTUS should take the case.

 

[delaware_export]

@press1280 and @jcutonilli

What is the status of OC in Maryland?

For all the talk of MSI and getting a permit, I am curious.

Edit. Found it.

With any carry requiring a permit in MD, and permits rather scarce, seems it’s pretty much denied. At least if this link is correct.

https://opencarry.org/state-info-i-m/maryland/

 

[press1280]

@press1280 and @jcutonilli

What is the status of OC in Maryland?

For all the talk of MSI and getting a permit, I am curious.

Edit. Found it.

With any carry requiring a permit in MD, and permits rather scarce, seems it’s pretty much denied. At least if this link is correct.

https://opencarry.org/state-info-i-m/maryland/

The link is basically correct, although if you are self employed you have a good shot at a permit. But OCing would not be wise even w/a permit