Circuit Court: ‘Unsettled’ if 2nd Amendment Applies Outside of Home
Washington DC - -(Ammoland.com)- In a case over New Jersey’s requirement that a citizen demonstrate “justifiable need” for a carrying a firearm before receiving a concealed carry license, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled that such a requirement “does not burden conduct within the scope of the Second Amendment’s guarantee.”
The court also said “it remains unsettled” whether the Second Amendment is even applicable outside one’s home.
And some people even question that "A well-regulated militia is necessary for the security of the free state".
ReplyDeleteQuestion it all you want. Unless it's removed by an amendment, it's part of the Constitution.
DeleteBut surely you think it applies outside the home. How is one supposed to muster inside their home?
DeleteFrom the article ...
ReplyDelete"The court also said 'it remains unsettled' whether the Second Amendment is even applicable outside one’s home."
The wording, "it remains unsettled", is double-speak for, "We are seeking as many judicial venues as possible to deny the 2nd Amendment in as many places as possible and haven't found enough such venues yet to totally deny the 2nd Amendment."
Laci's comment is typically inane.
ReplyDeleteThis should go to the Supreme Court. In its current makeup, we'll get a good ruling.
The Seventh Circuit seems to have it settled,
ReplyDelete"In a 2-1 decision (Williams dissenting), the Court reversed both District Courts' decisions and orders. Judge Posner, writing for the majority, notes that while the Heller and McDonald decisions did say that the need for self-defense is most acute inside the home, that doesn't mean it is not also acute outside the home. "Confrontations are not limited to the home".[4] The distinct use of the words "keep" and "bear" in the text of the Second Amendment, the Court reasoned, implied the right to carry outside one's home, as in historical context, the meaning of the word did not limit it to the home and it would be awkward to attempt to assign that connotation to documents of the time period"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore_v._Madigan
It's far from settled. That's why you guys are so nervous about your precious rights. When Hillary takes over the presidency for eight years, the Supreme Court will be changed dramatically and many of these debatable questions will be settled.
ReplyDeleteWe'll get a case in before 2016, and don't be too confident about Clinton. You think Obama is hated. Just wait.
DeleteYou always accuse us of being single issue voters to the detriment of other liberties (a charge that wouldn't hold if you saw our actual voting records), but you're perfectly happy to have Hillary come in, continue Obama's horrible history on civil liberties, etc. all because you think you'll at least get this ONE thing.
DeleteNice.
You almost had me there. T. The fact is although I despise the foreign policy decisions made under the Obama Administration, and I don't expect Hillary to improve much on those, there are other major issues that I think would benefit from a continued Democratic presidency, gay rights, women's rights, marijuana reform and last but not least, gun control.
DeleteMaybe you should consider Rand Paul. Sure, you'd lose gun control, but you'd get all those other things, plus foreign policy that is not despicable. You're not a single issue voter, are you?
DeleteSupporting Hillary Clinton is being a battered citizen asking for a new abuser. Except that she isn't new. We've been abused by her before.
DeleteI'm not a single issue voter, TS, but the lack of gun control is a deal breaker for me.
DeleteStrange priorities, Mikeb. Strange priorities.
DeleteI'm not a single issue voter except for one issue...
Delete