Delaware Concealed Carry Forum
State News & Gun News => NRA & National Gun News => Topic started by: DelawareGold on June 23, 2022, 02:42:14 PM
-
The New York "proper cause" requirement violates the Constitution, Thomas explains, because it only allows public-carry licenses when an applicant shows a special need for self-defense.
Thomas says in the intro that the court is holding "that the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect an individual's right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home.
The court rejects the "two-part" approach used by the courts of appeals in Second Amendment cases. "In keeping with Heller," Thomas writes, "we hold that when the Second Amendment's plain text covers an individual's conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct."
This test, Thomas adds, "accords with how we protect other constitutional rights."
The government will have to show, Thomas says, that a gun regulation "is consistent with this Nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation."
-
"they say" this will lead to more guns (in public)......well yes, BY THE GOOD GUYS.
-Simon
-
*The court rejects the "two-part" approach used by the courts
of appeals in Second Amendment cases.
This is really the most important sentence in the decision. So many
Appeal cases are lost because of "creative reasoning" in interpreting
the law. Without guidance, they have been allowed to get away with
rejecting lower court decisions by using faulty reasoning. Now they
have clear guidance. We aren't out of the woods yet, but it's a start.
-
Some of the news media is saying that Delaware is one of the states that this will overturn their concealed carry law. I actually rather doubt that because Delaware for the most part has been issuing almost like shall issue. However portions of the Delaware law such as the five signatures especially for newcomers to the state may actually be unconstitutional.
Looks like New Jersey and Maryland will certainly be unconstitutional
-
I can't wait to go to New Jersey, New York, and Maryland for my
CCW License.'
California, I don't ever plan to go there. I don't like Granola. Why
would I go to a place that is nothing but "fruits and nuts".
-
*The court rejects the "two-part" approach used by the courts
of appeals in Second Amendment cases.
This is really the most important sentence in the decision. So many
Appeal cases are lost because of "creative reasoning" in interpreting
the law. Without guidance, they have been allowed to get away with
rejecting lower court decisions by using faulty reasoning. Now they
have clear guidance. We aren't out of the woods yet, but it's a start.
This is excellent news and I think it will have a big impact on the new laws that are on the Governor's desk. Do you think he will veto them or sign them anyways and force an appeal (which we'll win)
-
Predictably, the media and Democrat state officials are already crying “wild west, OK corral and blood in the streets”
-
I guess they'll actually have to press charges on the people they arrest and maybe do something about the poverty and living conditions that contribute to gun crime and gang violence. They could change America without touching our rights if they really wanted to.
-
I can't wait to go to New Jersey, New York, and Maryland for my
CCW License.'
California, I don't ever plan to go there. I don't like Granola. Why
would I go to a place that is nothing but "fruits and nuts".
This decision will make reciprocity a real issue. Clearly cannot treat the Right to Keep and Bear Arms as a second class right. Now must all states recognize each other carry licenses? A topic for a future court case.
-
Don't think so Sprue. With increased wealth and stability comes power. Power that they don't want the "common people" to have. They might rise up and overthrow their oppressors, the Left-Wing powerbase.
-
Clarence, remember it wasn't long ago the Se. John Cornyn (R) of Texas was pushing nationwide CC for everyone as the US Concealed Carry Reciprocity act. Now it seems, to me, he has jumped over to the Left side with the Gun Grabbers.
-
What I say when I'm running for office, what I do once I'm elected.
It's a big club, and we ain't in it.
-
Some of the news media is saying that Delaware is one of the states that this will overturn their concealed carry law. I actually rather doubt that because Delaware for the most part has been issuing almost like shall issue. However portions of the Delaware law such as the five signatures especially for newcomers to the state may actually be unconstitutional.
Looks like New Jersey and Maryland will certainly be unconstitutional
Not to mention it sometimes taking 6 months or more to process. With today's technology it should be a matter of weeks at most.
-
As the forum's token Leftist, I read a lot of things that would make you puke, written by Leftists like me.
Here is my public response to them:
I'm an unrepentant Leftist, so many of my friends disagree with me about the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.
Here's the truth about today's SCOTUS ruling:
It only affects law-abiding gun owners who seek a concealed carry permit (and submit to background checks, training, etc.)... but who live in the few states that require some sort of proof that they NEED to carry.
The ruling does not establish "constitutional (permitless) carry" nationwide, nor does it allow ANY person without a permit to carry ANYWHERE they could not carry yesterday. All it does is strike down the laws that say, "Even if you're legally eligible for a permit, we're not required to give you one."
Those laws WERE unconstitutional, and striking them down will not increase crime. People who seek and obtain concealed carry permits generally don't commit crimes: if they were criminals willing to break the law, they wouldn't NEED a permit.
Don't like it? Change the Constitution.
-
God love you OGG but it’s not just about the qualifications to get the license. It’s about a fundamental right that is merely acknowledged by the constitution. ANY qualifications on that right is an infringement.
An armed man is a free man. A disarmed man is a slave.
-
God love you OGG but it’s not just about the qualifications to get the license. It’s about a fundamental right that is merely acknowledged by the constitution. ANY qualifications on that right is an infringement.
An armed man is a free man. A disarmed man is a slave.
I agree 100%. I'm just pointing out to the Left that the sky isn't falling. One actual headline: "In radical decision, Supreme Court all but nullifies states’ right to control guns."
If only that were true...
-
I really like your take on this OGG. I too lean left on most issues except for when it comes to the the constitution and that's why I'd like to see states doing more to tackle the root causes of violence. There's no denying that the majority of crime takes place in low income areas and democrats need to address that rather than infringing upon law abiding people.
-
Uncle Joe has said a number of times, no Amendment of the Constitution is absolute. That makes me think that he has no business in any position he ever held. Now we have to fight some of the republicans as well, bummer.
-
What this Supreme Court ruling "should" do is clarify the guidance to
the Appeals courts regarding the logic used to make decisions going
forward. The Appeals court, has been using a creative 2-part strategy
to nullify lower courts, Constitutional interpretation of the law. Now
The Appeals courts have been put on notice that:
A) The SC approves only the three-part logic that was applied in
"DC vs Heller".
and
B) The courts rulings must be consistent with the nation's historical
tradition of firearm regulation. The history of tradition of firearm
regulation, did not make a distinction between a hunting gun, and
a defensive gun, and a war gun. Has always presumed that the projectile
has to get to the chamber somehow. From powder, patch, and ball, to
cartridge's, to feeding device. This has always been part and parcel of
what was referred to as "Arms". Now, that historical context must be part
of new legislation, or risk being overturned at the SC level. This may not
stop Legislatures, and Governors from passing unconstitutional laws, but
sets them up to be struck down at the Appellate level. As the pendulum
swings back, the stage is set for the repeal of these unconstitutional laws.
-
It's been a good long minute since I posted here, but I must admit, this opinion of the Court is a major arrow in the quiver of all comers now who want to challenge gun control legislation.
Like others, I'm quite curious as to how this will affect pending new legislation at the State and Federal levels.