Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Supreme Court's next big gun case: constitutional carry

  1. #1
    Registered User LAGC's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    8,655

    Supreme Court's next big gun case: constitutional carry

    Edward Peruta is a litigious Vietnam veteran who spends part of each year living out of a trailer home in San Diego.

    Neil Gorsuch is a conservative Coloradan with impeccable Ivy League judicial credentials.

    Peruta’s legal challenge to San Diego County’s concealed carry permitting system has been winding its way through the federal court system since 2009.

    Gorsuch was sworn in as the newest associate justice of the Supreme Court just four days ago.

    On Thursday, their fortunes will meet when Gorsuch joins his first-ever Supreme Court conference to discuss whether the bench should hear Peruta v. California , which asks whether the Second Amendment protects a right to carry guns in public spaces. It could be the most consequential gun case since the Court confirmed the individual right to bear arms in District of Columbia v. Heller nearly a decade ago.
    http://www.businessinsider.com/gun-c...e-court-2017-4

    This could get interesting... could really put a damper in all those places (especially in California and New York) that require the sheriff to sign off before you can even get a permit. (Which of course, usually only happens if you have some serious connections from on high...)
    "That tyranny has all the vices both of democracy and oligarchy is evident. As of oligarchy so of tyranny, the end is wealth; (for by wealth only can the tyrant maintain either his guard or his luxury). Both mistrust the people, and therefore deprive them of their arms." -- Aristotle, Book V, 350 B.C.E

  2. #2
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Wreckless driving on dirty back roads
    Posts
    8,959
    What the hell would the overlords of cali care. Find another way to keep it in the courts for 10 years while they become
    crazier......
    While no one ever listens to me,
    I am constantly being told to be quiet.

    In a world of snowflakes,
    be the heat..

  3. #3
    Senior Member Justin's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    1,100
    I pray that Neil Gorsuch will rule in favor of second amendment rights, and I also pray that all judges who ruled in favor of the second amendment in DC vs Heller will rule in favor of constitutional carry as well. BTW, I thought LAGC was banned?

  4. #4
    Team Guns Network Silver 04/2013 alismith's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    44th "Free" State
    Posts
    19,018
    Quote Originally Posted by Justin View Post
    I pray that Neil Gorsuch will rule in favor of second amendment rights, and I also pray that all judges who ruled in favor of the second amendment in DC vs Heller will rule in favor of constitutional carry as well. BTW, I thought LAGC was banned?
    He's served his penance/life's reflection time.
    "Valar morghulis; valar dohaeris."

    Commucrats are most efficient at converting sins and crimes to accidents or misunderstandings.-Oswald Bastable

    Making good people helpless won't make bad people harmless.

    Freedom isn't free.

    "Attitude is the paintbrush that colors our world." TV Series, Haven.

    My Spirit Animal has rabies.

    I'd rather be an American than a Democrat.

    "If you can make a man afraid, you can control him" Netflix Series, The Irregulars

  5. #5
    Administrator imanaknut's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Indiana, a state that is trying to remain free.
    Posts
    12,280
    The sad part is the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed pretty much sums it up. They just don't understand the English language of the 1700s. Actually they do, they just don't want to because it would mean we the people are truly in control of the United States of America.

  6. #6
    Senior Member Justin's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    1,100
    Quote Originally Posted by alismith View Post
    He's served his penance/life's reflection time.
    How long has it been? That takes some dedication to come back after all of this time.

  7. #7
    Senior Member Justin's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    1,100
    Quote Originally Posted by imanaknut View Post
    The sad part is the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed pretty much sums it up. They just don't understand the English language of the 1700s. Actually they do, they just don't want to because it would mean we the people are truly in control of the United States of America.
    I agree, it's ridiculous that DC vs Heller was decided in a 5-4 ruling. It should have been 9-0!

  8. #8
    Guns Network Contributor 04/2013 El Laton Caliente's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    In the East Texas woods
    Posts
    6,158
    I hate to point out that the Bill of Rights only limits the Federal Government not a state's laws. The reason Heller went our way was that Washington DC is a Federal Government preserve and not under a state's governance.

    IMHO, the 2nd would nullify The Brady Act, NFA, 1968 and any other FEDERAL law controlling weapons. BUT, it does not apply to state laws...

    He is going to lose...
    We found out what "dealing" with progressive lefties is all about. Our side gives up something, they give up nothing and the progressives come back in a month or a year and want us to give up more... rinse and repeat...

  9. #9
    Team Guns Network Silver 04/2013 alismith's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    44th "Free" State
    Posts
    19,018
    Quote Originally Posted by El Laton Caliente View Post
    I hate to point out that the Bill of Rights only limits the Federal Government not a state's laws. The reason Heller went our way was that Washington DC is a Federal Government preserve and not under a state's governance.

    IMHO, the 2nd would nullify The Brady Act, NFA, 1968 and any other FEDERAL law controlling weapons. BUT, it does not apply to state laws...

    He is going to lose...
    But, the state cannot deny any guaranteed rights of the people, from the people.

    One way of looking at what you said, that the Fed can't step on the state's toes, is that if some states decided to re-institute slavery, they could and the Fed couldn't stop it; or that if a state passed a law prohibiting its citizens the right to a fair trial, the Fed couldn't step in and force them to stop.

    I think that any rights that fall under the protection of the Constitution, can be enforced by the Fed.

    I could be wrong....I don't know.
    "Valar morghulis; valar dohaeris."

    Commucrats are most efficient at converting sins and crimes to accidents or misunderstandings.-Oswald Bastable

    Making good people helpless won't make bad people harmless.

    Freedom isn't free.

    "Attitude is the paintbrush that colors our world." TV Series, Haven.

    My Spirit Animal has rabies.

    I'd rather be an American than a Democrat.

    "If you can make a man afraid, you can control him" Netflix Series, The Irregulars

  10. #10
    Senior Member NAPOTS's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    3,750
    That doesn't make any sense at all. So the states can make a law outlawing Christianity? Prohibiting the publishing of newspapers, having trials without juries and torturing people in the county jail? Can states make a law prohibiting blacks from voting?

  11. #11
    Registered User LAGC's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    8,655
    Ideally, the U.S. Constitution IS supposed to supersede and override anything that goes on at the state-level.

    States can enumerate rights in their own state constitutions BEYOND what is afforded in the (federal) Bill of Rights, but cannot be more restrictive.

    At least, that's how it is SUPPOSED to work. Ideally. The reality, of course, is a bit different.

    And keep in mind, even though the 2008 Heller decision had to do with only DC, the 2010 McDonald v. Chicago decision pretty much settled whether or not the provisions of the Second Amendment extended beyond federal enclaves to the states. So there is precedent here.

    But of course, the justices in those cases still left many questions unanswered. Which is why so many of these issues are still being hashed out in the courts.
    "That tyranny has all the vices both of democracy and oligarchy is evident. As of oligarchy so of tyranny, the end is wealth; (for by wealth only can the tyrant maintain either his guard or his luxury). Both mistrust the people, and therefore deprive them of their arms." -- Aristotle, Book V, 350 B.C.E

  12. #12
    Team Guns Network Silver 04/2013 alismith's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    44th "Free" State
    Posts
    19,018
    Quote Originally Posted by Justin View Post
    How long has it been? That takes some dedication to come back after all of this time.
    Two years. Time flies when you're having fun, right?
    "Valar morghulis; valar dohaeris."

    Commucrats are most efficient at converting sins and crimes to accidents or misunderstandings.-Oswald Bastable

    Making good people helpless won't make bad people harmless.

    Freedom isn't free.

    "Attitude is the paintbrush that colors our world." TV Series, Haven.

    My Spirit Animal has rabies.

    I'd rather be an American than a Democrat.

    "If you can make a man afraid, you can control him" Netflix Series, The Irregulars

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •