10th Circuit: You have no right to carry concealed

[lord1234]

JURIST - Paper Chase: Tenth Circuit finds no Second Amendment right to concealed weapons

Looks like this is headed to SJC

 

[s4mt3k]

CONCEALED carry might not be protected under 2A but since Open carry is prohibited in Denver, not allowing someone to carry the only way the State allows it becomes a violation of 2A. We shall see.

 

[MrScrewzloose]

Open Carry then?

 

[MichaelJR]

Anyone want to wager how this will end?

 

[Gidge]

Anyone want to wager how this will end?

It will end with you calling go-time ?

 

[edhead35]

It depends on what your definition of bear arms is.

 

[Dark-V]

I still prefer this form of bear arms:

 

[WallHack]

Who wants to bet this decision was influenced by recent tragic events? Anyone? Anyone??

Sent from my BlackBerry 9900 using Tapatalk

 

[Garden12]

Open Carry then?

This. The WSJ reported that it may have been succeded if they challenged open carry.

The 10th Circuit suggested Friday that Mr. Peterson may have succeeded had he challenged a Denver ordinance that restricted the open carrying of firearms—rather than the just the issue of concealed weapons.

Hopefully they do.

Appeals Court Backs a Ban on Concealed Weapons - WSJ.com

 

[Garden12]

Who wants to bet this decision was influenced by recent tragic events? Anyone? Anyone??

Sent from my BlackBerry 9900 using Tapatalk

I don't know. The same day this ruling came, in Illinois, the 7th circuit let their ruling stand in granted citzens the right to concealed carry. They basically told the Illinois legislature to hurry up or they'll be in contempt of court. For some reason the media didn't report the Illinois decison.

SAF Press Release :: 7TH CIRCUIT LETS POSNER RULING STAND; HUGE WIN FOR CCW, SAYS SAF

 

[SalemCat]

I get scared anytime the Supreme Court gets involved.

Too many bad decisions lately.

 

[ShaunSweeney]

I'm fine with open carry everywhere. My thigh rig is much more comfy than my IWB

 

[Business]

I'm fine with open carry everywhere. My thigh rig is much more comfy than my IWB

yup, please give me a reason to buy a drop leg holster I beg you

 

[exo]

So if the 10th says no and the 7th says yes, does that basically guarantee that the Supreme Court will take the case?

 

[davemata]

yup, please give me a reason to buy a drop leg holster I beg you

you need a reason?

 

[Parker Duofold]

So if the 10th says no and the 7th says yes, does that basically guarantee that the Supreme Court will take the case?

This is like red meat for the SCOTUS.

IANAL

 

[SalemCat]

Wouldn't Open Carry everywhere be great ?

I'd use a Holster with a large flap, as I'm no exhibitionist.

I'm thinking it would make the LEO's job easier, too. Less laws = Less work.

 

[Bfatz]

10th circuit I am in fear of COPS open carrying what is the courts opinion?

 

[Satcom]

I don't know. The same day this ruling came, in Illinois, the 7th circuit let their ruling stand in granted citzens the right to concealed carry. They basically told the Illinois legislature to hurry up or they'll be in contempt of court. For some reason the media didn't report the Illinois decison.

SAF Press Release :: 7TH CIRCUIT LETS POSNER RULING STAND; HUGE WIN FOR CCW, SAYS SAF

That is because Illinois currently has no way to carry outside the home. Open or concealed.

 

[KBCraig]

I love their reasoning: "Because carry is so heavily restricted and regulated, the right doesn't exist."

lolwhut?

That's like saying minorities didn't really have the right to vote in Alabama in 1960.

 

[Jason Flare]

Anyone want to wager how this will end?

I've got $50.00 on, "Badly."

 

[Knuckle Dragger]

We reported this last week when it happened and we're still waiting to hear from Mr. Peterson if he'll appeal to the Supreme Court.

You'll recall that Comm2A (eagerly) participated in an amicus brief on behalf of Mr. Peterson and that Alan Gura represented amici during oral arguments.

We also don't know if Illinois will appeal their loss in the 7th circuit. If anything the decisions in Peterson and Moore add more weight to the Kachalsky petition.

 

[Finalygotabeltfed]

F the 10th circuit and the horse they rode in on.

They have no right to even discuss the matter.

 

[wahsben]

The 2nd does not stipulate how one must bear their arms.

 

[NewGuyRay]

We reported this last week when it happened and we're still waiting to hear from Mr. Peterson if he'll appeal to the Supreme Court.

You'll recall that Comm2A (eagerly) participated in an amicus brief on behalf of Mr. Peterson and that Alan Gura represented amici during oral arguments.

We also don't know if Illinois will appeal their loss in the 7th circuit. If anything the decisions in Peterson and Moore add more weight to the Kachalsky petition.

From a scan of the decisions in our losses on concealed carry at the federal appellate level, it seems as though courts predisposed to rule against concealed carry are conveniently hiding behind 19th century precedent and social conventions -- both of which may be outmoded and possibly invalid in today's context.

As we know from history, the 19th century was a time when open carry was the honorable norm and duels were a socially acceptable means of defending one's honor. Only someone of disrepute and a scoundrel would consider concealed carry to be acceptable. The existence of the laws banning concealed carry were in no way an endorsement of the view that 2nd Amendment rights don't extend outside the home. Yet some courts are inclined to use the existence of those laws for just that purpose.

While it is convenient for courts today to use the "bound by precedent" approach to upholding bans on concealed carry, isn't it possible that those 19th century precedents are no longer relevant today? When those precedents were set, the 2nd Amendment was not widely seen as a fundamental right, and as such, any level of scrutiny applied in assessing those laws would be inadequate in today's context where the 2A has finally been elevated to the status of a Fundamental Right?

 

[Apathesis]

From a scan of the decisions in our losses on concealed carry at the federal appellate level, it seems as though courts predisposed to rule against concealed carry are conveniently hiding behind 19th century precedent and social conventions -- both of which may be outmoded and possibly invalid in today's context.

As we know from history, the 19th century was a time when open carry was the honorable norm and duels were a socially acceptable means of defending one's honor. Only someone of disrepute and a scoundrel would consider concealed carry to be acceptable. The existence of the laws banning concealed carry were in no way an endorsement of the view that 2nd Amendment rights don't extend outside the home. Yet some courts are inclined to use the existence of those laws for just that purpose.

While it is convenient for courts today to use the "bound by precedent" approach to upholding bans on concealed carry, isn't it possible that those 19th century precedents are no longer relevant today? When those precedents were set, the 2nd Amendment was not widely seen as a fundamental right, and as such, any level of scrutiny applied in assessing those laws would be inadequate in today's context where the 2A has finally been elevated to the status of a Fundamental Right?

This. Kentucky and Louisiana were the first states to prohibit concealed carry on the basis that only someone with ill intent would choose to hide a firearm. Making decisions based on historical precedent must also take into account the context the decision was made in.

 

[Finalygotabeltfed]

When those precedents were set, the 2nd Amendment was not widely seen as a fundamental right, and as such, any level of scrutiny applied in assessing those laws would be inadequate in today's context where the 2A has finally been elevated to the status of a Fundamental Right?

What are you talking about?

The 2nd has been seen as and was codified as a fundamental right from the moment it was penned to paper in the Bill of Rights and understood as such long before that.

 

[Jaymass2175]

Regulators!!!...........Mount up