Subdeacon Joe Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/06/11/peruta-v-san-diego-analyzed/ By David Kopel June 11 The 9th Circuit in Peruta v. San Diego upheld longstanding precedent that theconcealed carrying of firearms may be prohibited. All 11 judges of the en banc court agreed bearing arms that are concealed is not, in itself, part of the Second Amendment right as that right has been traditionally understood. To the majority of seven judges, this was the only legal issue. According to the the four dissenters, the full legal context should have been considered. Although there is some doctrinal unanimity in Peruta, there is also disagreement about judicial respect for the right to bear arms. Link to comment
Dantankerous Posted June 13, 2016 Share Posted June 13, 2016 Someone please explain to me how the concealed part should make a turd's of bit of difference with regard to arguing or applying the Second Amendment? The Second certainly states "...to keep and bear arms".... oh yeah, and then there's the .." Shall not be infringed" part... It does not regulate HOW one bears arms. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.