This morning the San Francisco-based 9th Circuit Court of Appeals dealt a huge blow to gun owners when they ruled, in a 7-4 ruling, Americans have no constitutional right to carry concealed firearms outside the home.
“We hold that the Second Amendment does not preserve or protect a right of a member of the general public to carry concealed firearms in public,” wrote Judge William A. Fletcher, an appointee of President Bill Clinton, for the seven-judge majority. He added, Lawmakers are free to enact “any prohibition or restriction a state may choose” on the carrying of concealed guns.
In his 52-page majority opinion in Peruta v. County of San Diego, Judge Fletcher reached back into history, and outside the U.S. in an attempt to rationalize taking away the public’s right to defend themselves. Quoting British laws prohibiting concealed weapons, Fletcher used a decree by Edward I to his sheriffs in 1299 to justify his position.
“Based on the overwhelming consensus of historical sources, we conclude that the protection of the Second Amendment—whatever the scope of that protection may be—simply does not extend to the carrying of concealed firearms in public by members of the general public,” Fletcher wrote.
The majority held that the Second Amendment “may or may not protect, to some degree, the right of a member of the general public to carry firearms in public.” But the court declined to address the matter of open carry laws.
The decision overturned a 2014 ruling by a smaller 9th Circuit panel that came in a lawsuit over the denial of concealed weapons permits by a sheriff in San Diego County.
An Assault on the Second Amendment is coming!
The decision highlights how close we are to losing our second amendment rights, and shows how important this coming election really is for gun owners.
Hilary Clinton has already stated she will put anti-gun activists on the Supreme Court, shifting the balance of the court and possibly killing our right to carry or even own a firearm. As I’ve pointed out numerous times in the past, only one vote on the Supreme Court has stood between the anti-gunners and our ability to defend ourselves and our family.
Whoever is elected will appoint not only a successor to Associate Justice Antonin Scalia, who died in February of this year but could actually place another 3 -4 Justices that expected to retire over the next 4 – 8 years.
Clinton Promises to Go After Guns
When Hillary kicked off her campaign late last year, she did so with the promise of going after the gun industry. Among her anti-gun policies, Clinton called for banning private gun sales without a background check and allowing gun violence victims to sue firearms manufacturers – a move intended to essentially bankrupt the industry.
While I’m not going to use this site to endorse a particular candidate, I will say that there are some strange relationships forming out there. You really have to wonder why so many Republicans seem to be lining up to take down the Republican nominee — something they know will then ensure a Hillary Clinton victory, and ensure we lose not only our 2nd amendment rights but a whole host or our constitutional rights as well.
Why would people like Glenn Beck, Mark Levin, Eric Erickson, and other so-called “conservatives” be spending millions of their own dollars to derail the current Republican nominee? After all, these are the same people who in the past told us we had to support losers like John McCain and Mitt Romney simply because they won the Republican primary. Could it be, as I pointed out in the past, that most of these so-called Republicans and “conservatives” are nothing but a bunch of cowards who actually hate the 2nd amendment?
Remember, Republicans have done just as much damage to our second amendment rights as the Democrats. After all, it was Ronald Reagan who banned fully automatic firearms, helped push the Brady Bill, and helped push the original “assault weapons” ban. With “friends of the 2nd amendment” like that, who needs enemies?