View Single Post
Old July 12, 2013, 12:39 AM   #31
dakota.potts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 25, 2013
Location: Keystone Heights, Florida
Posts: 3,084
Here is something else I read from this case.

When and how those restraints may be applied has been and will be the subject of extensive litigation. In Peterson, 707 F.3d at 1201, the Tenth Circuit held that the scope of the Second Amendment’s protection does not include a right to carry a concealed firearm outside the home. That ruling is binding on this Court and defeats the Plaintiffs’ contention that Mr. Bonidy should be free to carry his concealed handgun on his person in the Avon Post Office and parking lot. But the Peterson panel did not address whether open carry of firearms outside the home is similarly unprotected; indeed, it explicitly declined to do so. See id. at 1208-09.

Those who believe in the primacy of collective security read Heller narrowly within the factual context in which the case arose. See discussion as to Part III.B in United States v. Masciandaro, 638 F.3d 458 (4th Cir. 2011); Piszczatoski v. Filko, 840 F. Supp. 2d 813 (D. N.J. 2012). Judge Posner persuasively discredited that reading by his textual analysis in the opinion deciding Moore v. Madigan, 702 F.3d 933 (7th Cir. 2012). Aside from the textual meaning of “bear arms,” he recognized the common-sense view that armed self-defense is important outside the home and that hunting takes place outside the home.

Accordingly, the Court concludes that the Second Amendment protects the right to openly carry firearms outside the home for a lawful purpose, subject to such restrictions as may be reasonably related to public safety.

...

In sum, openly carrying a firearm outside the home is a liberty protected by the Second Amendment.
dakota.potts is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.03065 seconds with 8 queries