Civic Register
| 4.26.21
Supreme Court to Hear Case on Second Amendment Right to Carry Concealed Handguns for Self-Defense
Do you support or oppose concealed carry licenses under the Second Amendment?
What’s the story?
- The Supreme Court announced on Monday that it will take up a gun rights case concerning New York’s restrictions on concealed carry permits later this year, which sets up a potential landmark Second Amendment ruling next year.
- New York law requires that a person applying for an unrestricted concealed carry license demonstrate “proper cause” exists for issuance of a license, including for target shooting, hunting, or self-defense. Concealed carry license applications are considered and issued at the local level, such as by the county sheriff or court system, and interpretations of “proper cause” vary between localities in New York.
- Known as New York Rifle & Pistol Association v. Corlett, the case before the Supreme Court concerns whether New York state’s denial of the petitioners’ applications for concealed-carry licenses for self-defense violated the Second Amendment.
- Oral arguments will be held in the fall after the Supreme Court’s next term begins in October 2021, and a decision in the case is expected in 2022.
What do the Constitution and the Supreme Court say about the Second Amendment?
- The Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution states: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Like other constitutional rights, the right to bear arms has been interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court in light of policies advanced by governments seeking to limit that right.
- The Supreme Court’s most significant decision related to gun rights came in 2008’s Heller v. District of Columbia, which held that individuals have the right to own a firearm for lawful purposes such as self-defense. D.C. attempted to ban handguns & mandate that rifles & shotguns either be kept unloaded & disassembled or bound by a trigger lock in the owner’s home. Both of those restrictions were found to be unconstitutional by a 5-4 majority. Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the majority opinion, which concluded:
“The handgun ban and the trigger-lock requirement (as applied to self-defense) violate the Second Amendment. The District’s total ban on handgun possession in the home amounts to a prohibition on an entire class of “arms” that Americans overwhelmingly chose for the lawful purpose of self-defense. Under any of the standards of scrutiny that the Court has applied to enumerated constitutional rights, this prohibition―in the place where the importance of the lawful defense of self, family, and property is most acute―would fail constitutional muster. Similarly, the requirement that any lawful firearm in the home be disassembled or bound by a trigger lock makes it impossible for citizens to use arms for the core lawful purpose of self-defense and is hence unconstitutional.”
- The majority opinion in Heller noted that its decision is specific to the restrictions at issue in the case and should not be interpreted as applying to other gun control policies, as “the Second Amendment right is not unlimited”:
“The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. ”
- Since Heller, there have been two notable decisions that reaffirmed & further shaped the legal debate surrounding Second Amendment rights.
- McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010): The Court held that the Second Amendment’s protections extend to state policies through the 14th Amendment’s Due Process Clause and apply to cities & states in the same manner Heller applied to D.C. The case concerned a similar handgun ban & restrictions on rifles & shotguns imposed by the city of Chicago, which were found to be unconstitutional.
- Caetano v. Massachusetts (2016): The Court unanimously held that the Second Amendment protects the right to possess "all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding, and that this Second Amendment right is fully applicable to the States." It struck down a ban on stun guns enacted by the state of Massachusetts
— Eric Revell
(Photo Credit: iStock.com / RichLegg)
The Latest
-
How To Help Civilians in UkraineHeavy shelling and fighting have caused widespread death, destruction of homes and businesses, and severely damaged read more... Public Safety
-
The Latest: Israel Evacuates Rafah, Palestinian Place of RefugeUpdated May 6, 2024, 12:00 p.m. EST The Israeli military is telling residents of Gaza who have sought shelter in Rafah to read more... Israel
-
Trump Hush Money Trial Enters Third Week, Strategy to ‘Deny, Deny, Deny’Updated May 6, 2024, 11:00 a.m. EST The criminal trial to determine whether Trump is guilty of falsifying records to cover up a read more... Law Enforcement
-
IT: Battles between students and police intensify, and... 💻 Should we regulate AI access to our private data?Welcome to Thursday, May 2nd, listeners... The battle between protesters and police intensifies on college campuses across the read more...
In this day and age you better get one and carry it with you!
We need to eliminate military weapons and check EVERYONES background.
The Conceal carry should fall under the 10th for each state to decide how they wish to handle it. Beyond that, if one is against guns or for more control, then the real argument should be whether or not to repeal the 2nd instead of trying to go around the edges.
When the police are pulling back, response times cut, crime is up in the cities; the citizens should have the means to defend and stand their ground against the bad guys.
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.
Ours is a peaceful country of knowledge reason and debate. There’s no reason for citizens to carry weapons
If the bad guys can do it we should too
If everyone could put away the guns we all we be safer
Proven fact if the criminals don’t know who’s carrying. The less crime you have
Gun possession is out of control and is a national crisis. Violence will only increase with the ability to carry concealed weapons.
An individual should be able to cross state lines with a concealed carry license without having to know 50 different laws.
With my husband a gun collector, he's also managed to leave his stamp on two houses. One in Oregon, which we rented half a house. The other, the one we own in Cleveland. In Oregon the gun went off and hit the molding under the wall. It also sent a bullet into the bookcase I was shelving books on. In Ohio, he did essentially the same thing; at the time we had 6 cats, too. I was away on the other side of town and when I got home for the weekend, I found a bullet hole in the library wall. He'd managed to send a bullet through the wall from the Computer Room into the neighboring room.
This makes it too easy to carry a gun anywhere. In Ohio, the only places you can't concealed carry a gun into is the Governor's Office and the State Legislature. Anywhere else -- bar, sports arena, school, restaurant, theater, gym, polling place -- that's fine.
This will make it too easy to carry firearms anywhere. In Cleveland, the only place where you can't carry firearms into are the Governor's office and the State Legislature. Anywhere else -- a bar, sports arena, school, restaurant, theater, gym. polling place --- that's fine.
The last thing we need is more guns and more senseless gun deaths.
Shall not be infringed! No license needed according to the Bill of Rights. Congress, this basic right must be defended.
I support carry and conceal if there is training and tests that need to be taken and passed. Guns are weapons, if the person carrying it has no clue how to use it, or in what instances it can be used and be legal people are going to get hurt.
this country is way too gun crazy as it is, so much so that the eagle as our national bird no longer is an accurate representation of us as a country & should be replaced by the chicken the national zeitgeist being paranoid as fuck & armed to the teeth
guns, especially concieled guns, are potential means for murder.
I don't know why the Supreme Court is hearing this case, hell half the states in this country allow idiots to carry concealed weapons. I have lived for 72 yrs. without carrying a gun and I suspect that I 99.9% of the idiots that carry weapons concealed or not can live their lives without toating a gun. When was the last time a mass shooting was prevented or stopped in progress by a gun toating private citizen? I can't recall any.