Supreme Court says Constitution protects right to carry a gun outside the home

[Hobby]

CNN
 —
The Supreme Court on Thursday struck down a New York gun law enacted more than a century ago that places restrictions on carrying a concealed handgun outside the home – an opinion marking the widest expansion of gun rights in a decade.

"Because the State of New York issues public-carry licenses only when an applicant demonstrates a special need for self-defense, we conclude that the State's licensing regime violates the Constitution," Justice Clarence Thomas wrote for the court's 6-3 majority.

The opinion changes the framework that lower courts will use going forward as they analyze other gun restrictions, which could include the proposals currently before Congress if they eventually become law.

"The majority's expansion of what the Second Amendment protects will have monumental ramifications far beyond carrying firearms in public – on everything from age restrictions to assault weapons bans to limits on high-capacity magazines," said Steve Vladeck, CNN Supreme Court analyst and professor at the University of Texas School of Law.

"We're in for a whole new slew of litigation challenging any and every gun-control measure in light of the analysis in today's ruling," Vladeck said.

Critics say the ruling will impair sensible solutions they think can curb gun violence.  

Only about a half dozen states have similar laws to New York's – California, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts and New Jersey – have similar regulations, but those states are comprised of some of the most densely populated cities in the country.

Twenty-five states generally allow people to carry concealed weapons in most public spaces without any permit, background check or safety training, according to the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence.

The US Supreme Court is seen in Washington, DC on February 8, 2022.
Supreme Court strikes down New York's handgun law
In his opinion, Thomas said that going forward the government "may not simply posit that the regulation promotes and important interest," instead he said the judges must look to text and history when deciding whether a law passes muster.

"Only if a firearm regulation is consistent with this Nation's historical tradition may a court conclude that the individual's conduct falls outside the Second Amendment's unqualified command," Thomas said. "We too agree, and now hold, consistent with Heller and McDonald, that the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect an individual's right to carry a hand- gun for self-defense outside the home."

https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/23/politics/supreme-court-guns-second-amendment-new-york-bruen/index.html

[Hobby]

Well how about that Sports Fans? I never thought along the lines of preexisting rights.  This will be game changer.

[HighStepper]

This keeps government from restricting gun toting outside the home. However, what about a private business? Dance clubs, sports stadiums, etc. Can they refuse to allow patrons to carry guns on their premises? What about bus/train/airplane terminals?

You cannot view this attachment.

[Hobby]

This keeps government from restricting gun toting outside the home. However, what about a private business? Dance clubs, sports stadiums, etc. Can they refuse to allow patrons to carry guns on their premises? What about bus/train/airplane terminals?

You cannot view this attachment.

I would think that a privately owned business could ban weapons from their property.  Back in Marshal Dillon's day he could take guns away from drunks and disorderly then give them back when they sobered up or where released from jail.  Some towns back in the 1800's prohibit guns on main streets.  Then there were the street gun fights..

[bats]

This keeps government from restricting gun toting outside the home. However, what about a private business? Dance clubs, sports stadiums, etc. Can they refuse to allow patrons to carry guns on their premises? What about bus/train/airplane terminals?

You cannot view this attachment.

With the current bunch of extremists on the court, everything is up for grabs. And not just with guns. Those hacks are set to push all of us into living according to their personal worldview rather than the legal principles set forth over 200 years or so.

The Supreme Court has lost all credibility, and that's dangerous.

[Blkfyre]

With the current bunch of extremists on the court, everything is up for grabs. And not just with guns. Those hacks are set to push all of us into living according to their personal worldview rather than the legal principles set forth over 200 years or so.

The Supreme Court has lost all credibility, and that's dangerous.

It's funny. Conservatives were all up in arms with a Democratic majority in congress talking about how awful it will be when they use that majority to ram liberal agenda down the country's throat. And yet, they are conspicuously silent when the Supreme Court is doing the same...

[Hobby]

I think the SCOTUS finally got it right.  The second amendment does not impose any restrictions as to who can own or carry a gun!  What has been happening is interpretations of the Second are used to justify laws that probably are unconstitutional. Has our society changed since 1779, sure has, and  IMO the Second is obsolete and should be abolished with a new amendment to clarify who many own guns and carry guns in the US... but probably will never happen, at least not in my lifetime. So no sense in bring up statistics and reasons or debates to have gun control over citizens, the SCOTUS has spoken for now and probably for the foreseeable future.

[bats]

I think the SCOTUS finally got it right.  The second amendment does not impose any restrictions as to who can own or carry a gun! 

The thing that is always unspoken (or usually unspoken) by "conservatives" is that they already accept a shit load of restrictions. For example, under most circumstances, you can't own machine guns. And that's to say nothing of the other kinds of advanced weaponry that is legally available only to the military.

Also, it has only been since 2008 that SCOTUS approved the "individual rights" theory of gun ownership. For the prior 70 years the law was that the prefatory clause about a "well regulated militia" actually meant something. But the 2008 court decided it was superfluous I guess.

Illiterate justices. lol

[Hobby]

The thing that is always unspoken (or usually unspoken) by "conservatives" is that they already accept a shit load of restrictions. For example, under most circumstances, you can't own machine guns. And that's to say nothing of the other kinds of advanced weaponry that is legally available only to the military.

Also, it has only been since 2008 that SCOTUS approved the "individual rights" theory of gun ownership. For the prior 70 years the law was that the prefatory clause about a "well regulated militia" actually meant something. But the 2008 court decided it was superfluous I guess.

Illiterate justices. lol

It's all in the past now...

[Hobby]

"It's funny. Conservatives were all up in arms with a Democratic majority in congress talking about how awful it will be when they use that majority to ram liberal agenda down the country's throat. And yet, they are conspicuously silent when the Supreme Court is doing the same..."

We have many Gun Laws. Many have accepted them as so-called common sense. The plain and simple fact, is all of them violate the 2 nd Amendment of Shall not Infringe. This was a narrow ruling dealing with just one case. But it affirms the 2 nd Amendment protects a Natural Individual Right the people had even before the Constitution and Bill of Rights were written. The 2nd Amendment protects that right from the Government. It does not grant that Right, nor its intended purpose of self defense because that right is natural and inalienable. That Shall Not Be Infringed.

[Bande]

With the current bunch of extremists on the court, everything is up for grabs. And not just with guns. Those hacks are set to push all of us into living according to their personal worldview rather than the legal principles set forth over 200 years or so.

The Supreme Court has lost all credibility, and that's dangerous.

They are actually siding with our Rights in the Constitution.
Private businesses can restrict whatever they want.

I'm glad I can put my racks back on the window to hold my firearms without retributions.
Crazy shit..
Used to be a standard had a truck you had a rack holding firearms.
Another sign of PUSSIFIED U.S.A.
Used to be standard and in school as well where one had Gun Safety and parents taught the kids on firearms.
That is pretty much non existent these days causing people to think its playtime with a toy.

[bats]

We have many Gun Laws. Many have accepted them as so-called common sense. The plain and simple fact, is all of them violate the 2 nd Amendment of Shall not Infringe.

That's an opinion, not a "plain and simple fact." And the only opinion that matters, in the end, is that of the Supreme Court, which has upheld many restrictions on guns.

It does seem like the current court is ready to loosen things up considerably. The case handed down today invites lots more challenges to existing restrictions.

[Hobby]

Is the Supreme Court ruling applying only to owning a gun? In other words people who are arrested or found with a gun have the right to carry the gun?  What about purchasing? Does the constitution apply to the right to buy a gun or can the state control who the gun is sold to? Can the state impose on gun shops who they sell guns to?

[HighStepper]

Used to be standard and in school as well where one had Gun Safety and parents taught the kids on firearms.
That is pretty much non existent these days causing people to think its playtime with a toy.

When I was growing up we kept a loaded 12gage shotgun. Everyone knew where it was. Behind the cellar door.
Never heard of a gun locker. Never played with a gun.

At a very young age taught my kids gun safety. Everybody knew where the guns where.
Nobody played with the guns. Had rifles and pistols. No mass murder weapons of war like nowadays.





You cannot view this attachment.

[Danno]

you could always have guns in your truck gun rack. where do you get this nonsense?

They are actually siding with our Rights in the Constitution.
Private businesses can restrict whatever they want.

I'm glad I can put my racks back on the window to hold my firearms without retributions.
Crazy shit..
Used to be a standard had a truck you had a rack holding firearms.
Another sign of PUSSIFIED U.S.A.
Used to be standard and in school as well where one had Gun Safety and parents taught the kids on firearms.
That is pretty much non existent these days causing people to think its playtime with a toy.