View Single Post
Old January 9, 2017, 01:25 AM   #6
Metal god
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 10, 2012
Location: San Diego CA
Posts: 4,763
If you followed the Peruta case you know it was complex in some ways . When peruta first filed . Open carry was still allowed . While Peruta wound it's way through the courts CA banned open carry as well .

Long story short the court ignored the fact Peruta no longer had an outlet ( open carry ) and ruled concealed carry was not a right but in a small way left the door open to open carry still being constitutional . How ever they refused to address that in the Peruta case .

Ok now that all said . Is Peruta even the case we want going to the SCOTUS . There is a lot of case law/ruling saying concealed carry is not a right . Most of those decisions were in states that had liberal open carry laws so in the grand scheme of things carrying outside the home was still allowed even though concealed carry was struck down . Which is something the 9th and other courts seem to ignore . They cling to the ruling saying restricting conceal carry is fine . while ignoring the fact those cases and plaintiffs still could open carry if they wanted .

Lets say they take the case , what will they look at ? Will they only view it as a concealed carry case ? If so , case law is not in are favor . What if they consider the fact that CA while the case was on going also banned the plaintiffs only other outlet . What then ? Do they consider that and rule on the case or do they send it back for trial and have it tried using the current laws in place ??
__________________
If Jesus had a gun , he'd probably still be alive !

I almost always write my posts regardless of content in a jovial manor and intent . If that's not how you took it , please try again .

Last edited by Metal god; January 9, 2017 at 12:45 PM.
Metal god is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.03841 seconds with 8 queries