Posted on 01/24/2019 4:46:08 PM PST by New Jersey Realist
In 2010, the Supreme Court ruled that cities and states may not abridge “the right to possess a handgun in the home for the purpose of self-defense.” It has not heard a Second Amendment case since, leaving most lower courts to assume that the right to bear arms applies “in the home,” as the justices ruled. But on Tuesday, the court agreed to review a New York City law that limits gun owners’ ability to transport their guns outside the home. And it appears quite likely that the new conservative majority will, for the very first time, extend the Second Amendment beyond the front door and out into the streets, unleashing lower courts to strike down long-standing restrictions on the public carrying of firearms.
(Excerpt) Read more at slate.com ...
Waaaaaa
People in the UP say “Meh!”
Even some so-called Republican police officers in Texas were anti-civilian gun.
Sadly, every other itty-bitty Texas sh*thole like Olmos Park harasses gun owners and even arrests people for open carry.
We need something a lot better than Texas’ law.
On Earth, as it is in Texas.
Yeah, what do we do about that closet homo Roberts?
Just in time for CWII.
AntiFa, be scared, be very scared.
I’d rather they mirror Liberal Utopia Vermont’s
Sounds wonderful. The USSC will stop unconstitutional infringements on one of our fundamental constitutional rights? Great! Should’ve happened generations ago.
Just wait until RBG dies.
I love it!
Texas? Texas doesn’t have Constitutional Carry.
More like Mississippi.
Like Austin?
The difference in gun laws from state to state is almost unbelievable, considering that it is a Constitutional right. From my understanding, it’s a felony if I bring a handgun into the state of New York. Here in Missouri I can conceal carry without the state’s permission, in California it depends on the county sheriff’s whim, while in NJ it is reserved for the politically connected.
Washington is considering a law that will restrict ammunition purchases to 20 rounds a month. It’s about time that the USSC declare Constitutional rights extend to all of the states.
They should look like Vermont.
“anti-civilian gun.”
Number of court ordered gun confiscations in Maryland in the past 3 months under red flag laws:
300
Number of officers declining to participate in the seizure:
0
The Supreme Court has absolutely no Constitutional grounds or authority to do so.
And how long, pray tell, will we continue to allow the Juridical Branch to legislate? The Constitution vests ALL legislative power to Congress (Art. I, Sec. 1), NOT the Supreme Court. The Court’s authority reaches ONLY to parties of the cases and controversies it hears (Art. III, Sec. 2) - as long as the decision has a sound and solid constitutional basis.
We are so far off the freaking tracks it is only God’s mercy we haven’t gone right over the cliff and into the abyss. God’s grace and mercy - our only hope for the restoration of our Free Constitutional Republic.
But our God is a big God and with a few Patriots, he can and will do miracles as he did here a little less than 250 years ago.
In Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1856), the Court laid out that the Founders never intended that a black man would have all the rights of citizens, which were listed to include:
For if they were so received, and entitled to the privileges and immunities of citizens, it would exempt them from the operation of the special laws and from the police regulations which they considered to be necessary for their own safety. It would give to persons of the negro race, who were recognised as citizens in any one State of the Union, the right to enter every other State whenever they pleased, singly or in companies, without pass or passport, and without obstruction, to sojourn there as long as they pleased, to go where they pleased at every hour of the day or night without molestation, unless they committed some violation of law for which a white man would be punished; and it would give them the full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, and to keep and carry arms wherever they went. And all of this would be done in the face of the subject race of the same color, both free and slaves, and inevitably producing discontent and insubordination among them, and endangering the peace and safety of the State.
Giddyup!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.