Supreme court cases

[Tero]

Concealed weapons
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/ ... id-215331P

[Hermit]

Concealed weapons
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/ ... id-215331P

"We're sorry, but that page cannot be found"

[laklak]

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/ ... oid-215331

[laklak]

Should be interesting if the reciprocity bill passes, it can be framed as a state's rights issue. Does California have to honor a Florida concealed carry permit? Concealed carry laws are far from uniform, though the trend has been towards reciprocity.

[Forty Two]

Concealed weapons
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/ ... id-215331P

What about them?

[L'Emmerdeur]

Here we go. Happily there will be no sedulous sophistry from an un-lamented Flatulent Twit, though of course all are welcome to snipe, in the spirit of the 2nd Amendment.

Meanwhile, interesting times trending toward downright fascinating. I know these folks, and the writer isn't mistaken about their thought process. He failed to mention the exaggerated and sometimes purely performative anxiety of those who've made a totem of their 'self defense' hardware.

'How the right wing uses the Constitution and the Supreme Court to squeeze liberty out of Americans they don’t like'

Consider an upcoming case to be heard before the United States Supreme Court. It's the biggest case on Second Amendment rights since Heller in 2008. Heller established the right to self-defense. The state is forbidden to outlaw guns for personal use and safety. In New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, plaintiffs hope to take Heller a step further to establish the right to conceal one's weapon.

It's important to understand the context of Bruen. Heller was decided before America elected its first Black president. After the election, the "gun-rights" movement sprang into action. I said this yesterday, but didn't say why. It's because democracy "unexpectedly" empowered non-white people. For many white people, empowered non-white people, especially Black people, means disempowered white people.

Something had to be done. Since American democracy could no longer be trusted, they turned to their guns. They turned to tactics to fight the feeling of being "enslaved." Thanks to Heller, they could legally carry their guns in public, in places where they'd never need a gun, like the library. They said they were exercising their rights. They were lying. They were doing exactly what the school board death-threat squads are doing now. (Local law enforcement officers said then as now that nothing can be done.) They were harassing, intimidating and threatening people they don't like. They were doing that because harassing, intimidating and threatening people makes them feel free.

[Svartalf]

OK, so I'll try sedulous sophistry and call the GOP and their lap ringwraiths a bunch of unmentionables.

I mean, the amendment says that the right to own and carry weapons will not be abridged, and as you know I'm a gun rigths loon, I'm okay with taking that quite literally, and to cast any 'ordered militia' based stuff to the bin.

But where in the seventh hell do they at all mention concealment? the right to carry is guaranteed, but nowhere in the text is there anything that would entail a right to conceal. So states should be quite free to regulate concealed carry as the deem fit.

[L'Emmerdeur]

I accept that the ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller is sound in regard to the Second Amendment, so you'll get no disagreement from me regarding the question of whether the American constitutional right to bear arms embraces the right to do so for self defense. I don't find any attempt in the article to dispute that either, only an examination of how Heller has subsequently been used by particular elements of American society. The author of the piece is writing about American society rather than American constitutional law.

The current court has shown itself to be willing to color outside the lines, so extending the right to bear arms to include the right to carry a concealed gun for purposes of self-defense is a plausible outcome.

I disagree with the lack of nuance in conclusion of the article--Heller does not prevent the 'out-group' from defending itself, rather it's selective enforcement (and outright disregard) of the out-group's rights which tends to do so.

[Svartalf]

Well, American society has been effed up and off the right track for some 40 years at least. I tend to use the election of reagan as a marker of the GOP becoming no longer a government party, but a bunch of loons whose motto for the American way of life is 'my way, or the highway to hell'. Of course, it might have deeper, older origins, such as the watergate scandal shocking the repubs into primal aggression mode in response to their shenanigans being challenged, buy 1980 was the first obvious manifestation of the brain rot that had seized them... and they've been getting ever worse ever since.

[Tero]

[Sean Hayden]

[Hermit]

Here's Alito's wonderfully snarky response to the blithering idiocy of the dissenting opinion. Those three, and particularly the "wise Latina" (oh FFS spare me) really do not understand the purpose of the court. Pretty much their entire dissent consisted of "Look! Squirrel!!!!".

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavl ... MP_SCZP3QA

From Alito's nonsensical rant:

And because many people face a serious risk of lethal violence when they venture outside their homes, the Second Amendment was understood at the time of adoption to apply under those circumstances.

The Court’s exhaustive historical survey establishes that point very clearly, and today’s decision therefore holds that a State may not enforce a law, like New York’s Sullivan Law, that effectively prevents its law-abiding residents from carrying a gun for this purpose.

In short, you can't prohibit carrying firearms outside the home because so many people carry firearms outside the home.

From List of countries by intentional homicide rate: USA - 6.3/100,000 (2020) Australia - 0.9/100,000 (2020). There is something absurd about thinking that carrying guns protects one from "serious risk of lethal violence" in a country where the chance of being murdered is 9 times higher than in a country where carrying guns for the purpose of self protection is prohibited. I am ever so glad I live in Australia rather than the United States of America.

[Tero]

I really hate his "tradition" wording. We must do everything as is done in America for a long time. Like 1900 and so. So we cannot solve anything with modern technology that was not invented then. "There is no abortion pill in the Constitution. You can have an abortion by drinking a bottle of whisky and taking a hot bath."

[laklak]

From List of countries by intentional homicide rate: USA - 6.3/100,000 (2020) Australia - 0.9/100,000 (2020). There is something absurd about thinking that carrying guns protects one from "serious risk of lethal violence" in a country where the chance of being murdered is 9 times higher than in a country where carrying guns for the purpose of self protection is prohibited. I am ever so glad I live in Australia rather than the United States of America.

Once again, our murder rate, when you take out cities and gang violence, is no worse than almost anyplace else. I simply do not care what they do to each other in Chicago or New York or LA, I don't live there and it has absolutely zero in common with any of the places I spend my time in the U.S. It's their fucking problem, let them sort it out. I'm not shooting up schools, I'm not murdering people, it's not my circus and not my monkeys. I'll keep my guns, and my ammo, and fuck the Federales.

[laklak]

Roe v Wade overturned.

Let the games begin!

I'm quite interested in what Florida is going to do. If DeSantis is truly eyeing the White House in '24 then a hardline anti-abortion stance wouldn't be prudent.

I'm actually quite glad to be in Eswatini right now, despite the anti-King shit.

If we keep our residence permits until 2029 I can be a citizen. Eish.