View Single Post
Old November 15, 2011, 11:37 AM   #26
Senior Member
Join Date: November 13, 2009
Posts: 232
Al, I follow your conclusion that while a state cannot prohibit the bearing of arms, they can regulate it. However, if strict scrutiny is applied (and I don't see how it won't be eventually if things continue the way they are, and certainly that would be the logical and moral stance considering that's what is applied to other natural rights) I don't see how banning a certain method of carry, as long as it is safe, could pass that kind of scrutiny. This may be the ultimate genius of Gura and company, but it's going to be increasingly difficult to argue that concealed carry poses any more of a public risk that open carry, or licensing provides better public safety than not, etc. If strict scrutiny is applied, most of this becomes mute. I am correct in thinking this?
tet4 is offline  
Page generated in 0.03313 seconds with 7 queries