Supreme Court won't rule on carrying guns in public

[TheSiege]

So does this mean they pretty much agree with the lower courts ruling? Or they just don't care about the issue? Or its an election year so they better not rock the boat?

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/05/05/supreme-court-guns-public/7884041/

From my simple minded standpoint, the 2nd amendment doesn't say one way or another so its really up to the states to decide.

 

[thraashman]

So does this mean they pretty much agree with the lower courts ruling? Or they just don't care about the issue? Or its an election year so they better not rock the boat?

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/05/05/supreme-court-guns-public/7884041/

From my simple minded standpoint, the 2nd amendment doesn't say one way or another so its really up to the states to decide.

Well it seems to be that usually when the USSC refuses to hear a case it's that they don't disagree with the lower court ruling but they don't wish to set a national precedent.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

I suspect they feel open carry a states rights issue.

 

[smackababy]

New Jersey law enforcement groups defended the state's requirement that citizens prove a "justifiable need" to carry handguns outside the home, whether openly or concealed from view.

What happens when a state decides that freedom of speech must have a "justifiable need" to be practiced in outside the home? Or, any other amendment for that matter?

 

[blake0812]

I suspect they feel open carry a states rights issue.

Would that be a bad thing? Personally I think not, if a state has bad crime they could ban or allow public carrying to try to make a difference, which is good.

 

[Knowing]

I think that it's interesting how carrying has been perceived over time.

It used to be that concealing your weapon indicated that you were likely to be up to no good. Now, the trend appears to have gone the opposite direction - conceal your weapon so that you don't hurt any feelings while you walk down the street.

Can anyone tell me what's confusing about "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed," particularly the "keep" and the "bear." It seems like a great deal of effort is being taken to split hairs about what's pretty clearly written. Even more confusing is the tendency of these people to call themselves "liberals," and for these people not to tolerate any scrutiny of other documented rights.

 

[Fern]

So does this mean they pretty much agree with the lower courts ruling? Or they just don't care about the issue? Or its an election year so they better not rock the boat?

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/05/05/supreme-court-guns-public/7884041/

From my simple minded standpoint, the 2nd amendment doesn't say one way or another so its really up to the states to decide.

I haven't read the ruling, but I suspect SCOTUS does see some prohibition on open carry as reasonable.

We have a long tradition of prohibition of open carry in cities/towns. From what I've heard, even in in the famous (or infamous) days of the Old West cowboys etc entering into a town were often required to check their guns in at the Sheriff's office.

I think it's also partly a state's rights issue for them. If you're in a rural area it may make sense to carry a gun with at work (ranching, farming etc.), but restricting that in urban areas makes sense. One rule to be applied nationally may not make sense; let the states make the decision. If they get too restrictive then the SCOTUS may take the issue up.

I don't there's much for them rule on at this point.

Fern

 

[Texashiker]

So does this mean they pretty much agree with the lower courts ruling?

Yes, I think so.

Public health and safety trump individual liberties. Remember the LA riots after the Rodney King verdict? Should some gang banger be allowed to carry an AK-47 while stealing a TV during widespread civil unrest?

I can see times when a local sheriff might issue an order stopping people from open carrying a firearm to maintain order.

Allowing a blanket ban would be unconstitutional.

There needs to be a balance where people have the right to bear arms, but local law enforcement needs to right to enact temporary bans to bring about order.

 

[smackababy]

Yes, I think so.

Public health and safety trump individual liberties. Remember the LA riots after the Rodney King verdict? Should some gang banger be allowed to carry an AK-47 while stealing a TV during widespread civil unrest?

I can see times when a local sheriff might issue an order stopping people from open carrying a firearm to maintain order.

Allowing a blanket ban would be unconstitutional.

During widespread civil unrest would be most likely time for a firearm to be used in self defense. If a group of people were running around rioting (looting and destroying property) you are damn sure I am going to be carrying my firearm.

And, why does certain amendments get to be challenged by the state? The 2nd amendment gives a citizen the right to bear arms. Bear an arm means to carry. Should states be allowed to regulate parts of amendments they deem fit? Can a state say that the 14th amendment only applies within your house?

 

[Texashiker]

During widespread civil unrest would be most likely time for a firearm to be used in self defense. If a group of people were running around rioting (looting and destroying property) you are damn sure I am going to be carrying my firearm.

Seems you are getting criminals confused with citizens.

During the la riots lawful gun owners protected their stores and homes with firearms.

The criminals on the other hand were the ones running around the streets.

The local sheriff and mayor needs the ability to restrict carrying a firearm in public to maintain order. Key word there, in public.

 

[SaurusX]

What's wrong with the status quo of concealed carry? What is tactical advantage to be gained by open carry? It only makes you stand out and draws unneeded attention to yourself. Attention whores.

 

[brycejones]

I haven't read the ruling, but I suspect SCOTUS does see some prohibition on open carry as reasonable.

We have a long tradition of prohibition of open carry in cities/towns. From what I've heard, even in in the famous (or infamous) days of the Old West cowboys etc entering into a town were often required to check their guns in at the Sheriff's office.

I think it's also partly a state's rights issue for them. If you're in a rural area it may make sense to carry a gun with at work (ranching, farming etc.), but restricting that in urban areas makes sense. One rule to be applied nationally may not make sense; let the states make the decision. If they get too restrictive then the SCOTUS may take the issue up.

I don't there's much for them rule on at this point.

Fern

Well in Kansas the governor just signed a law prohibiting cities from having local restrictions on open carry. Its interesting that the party that gets the most but hurt about "mandates from Washington" has no problem overriding local control when its for their pet political positions.

 

[Texashiker]

What's wrong with the status quo of concealed carry? What is tactical advantage to be gained by open carry? It only makes you stand out and draws unneeded attention to yourself. Attention whores.

Ever try to carry a shotgun, AK, AR, FN/FAL,,, concealed?

 

[jad1097]

I suspect they feel open carry a states rights issue.

It is

 

[SaurusX]

Ever try to carry a shotgun, AK, AR, FN/FAL,,, concealed?

And the purpose of that would be...?

 

[Texashiker]

And the purpose of that would be...?

Do you know your history?

Tell me about the battle of New Orleans in 1815. Was it the US army that defended New Orleans?

Tell me about the Alamo in 1836.

Tell me about the Wounded Knee Massacre.

 

[brycejones]

Do you know your history?

Tell me about the battle of New Orleans in 1815. Was it the US army that defended New Orleans?

Tell me about the Alamo in 1836.

Tell me about the Wounded Knee Massacre.

So your position is we need be constantly carrying long guns and shot guns because you think a battle might erupt with no notice?!?

 

[Texashiker]

So your position is we need be constantly carrying long guns and shot guns because you think a battle might erupt with no notice?!?

Its nice how you added that keyword "constantly."

That would be paranoid to constantly carry a rifle because you think a war is about to erupt. People who live in constant state of paranoia need help and probably medicine.

Why dont you rephrase your question to something a little more realistic and then we can have an honest discussion.

 

[smackababy]

Seems you are getting criminals confused with citizens.

During the la riots lawful gun owners protected their stores and homes with firearms.

The criminals on the other hand were the ones running around the streets.

The local sheriff and mayor needs the ability to restrict carrying a firearm in public to maintain order. Key word there, in public.

I am confused at what you're saying. The law abiding citizens attempting to protect their business and possibly life from criminals needs to be restricted by the sheriff and mayor because criminals are abound?

 

[brycejones]

Its nice how you added that keyword "constantly."

That would be paranoid to constantly carry a rifle because you think a war is about to erupt. People who live in constant state of paranoia need help and probably medicine.

Why dont you rephrase your question to something a little more realistic and then we can have an honest discussion.

You referenced 3 battles when asked why people needed to carry long guns in public. Do you have another example you like to use so we can have a real discussion?

 

[Fern]

Well in Kansas the governor just signed a law prohibiting cities from having local restrictions on open carry. Its interesting that the party that gets the most but hurt about "mandates from Washington" has no problem overriding local control when its for their pet political positions.

I'm not quite sure what your point is, but I see no problem with a state having that right or power to have uniform laws where it's feasible. I believe it's inherently problematic to have a mishmash of such laws. E.g., I live in a very rural county with a small population and we have at least a dozen different towns/cities/villages and they often share borders. So if I leave from my office in a town that allows open carry and pass through another that doesn't on my way home I'm in big trouble if i get stopped for some reason (DL checkpoint etc.). That makes no sense to me, unless that town wants to raise money like a speed trap.

Fern

 

[Texashiker]

I am confused at what you're saying. The law abiding citizens attempting to protect their business and possibly life from criminals needs to be restricted by the sheriff and mayor because criminals are abound?

Are you dense? Seriously, did your mom repeatably drop you on your head over and over?

Nobody has said anything about "not" protecting your home.

Are you going to protect your family and home from a mile away? Maybe 2 miles? Maybe protect your home while stealing a case of beer and a new TV?

Last time I heard someone needed to be "around" their home to protect it. Having your AR or AK in your own front yard as in on private property is not the same as looting that liquor store.

 

[smackababy]

Are you dense? Seriously, did your mom repeatably drop you on your head over and over?

Nobody has said anything about "not" protecting your home.

Are you going to protect your family and home from a mile away? Maybe 2 miles? Maybe protect your home while stealing a case of beer and a new TV?

Last time I heard someone needed to be "around" their home to protect it. Having your AR or AK in your own front yard as in on private property is not the same as looting that liquor store.

So, the owner of the liquor store is not allowed to have his shotgun? How about me, driving through a neighborhood when a riot breaks out?

 

[SaurusX]

I'll absolutely concede that if you're caught in the middle of a war zone or a full blown riot ala Ukraine, then the rules have changed and open carry is absolutely an option. Until then, I say keep the CCW hidden and you won't freak out the delicate flowers amongst us.