|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
‘2A Protects Right to Carry in Public for Self-Defense,’ Says 9th Circuit
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://constitutionnetwork.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
In a 2-1 bombshell opinion issued Tuesday, a panel of the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that, “for better or for worse, the Second Amendment does protect a right to carry a firearm in public for self-defense” and that the open carrying of firearms for that purpose “falls within the core of the Second Amendment.”
Alan Gottlieb, chairman of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, and founder of the Second Amendment Foundation, told Liberty Park Press that SAF “has always said that you have to allow some form of carry for self-defense. If you ban concealed carry you must allow open carry or vice a versa.” |
| Comment by:
MarkHamTownsend
(7/25/2018)
|
| The ninth circus has either gone insane, smoked too much MaryJane, or ....I hesitate to suggest this .... read the Constitution & Bill of Rights. |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(7/25/2018)
|
This headline is misleading, and is similar to all I've seen on this event.
It should read,
‘2A Protects Right to Carry in Public for Self-Defense,’ Says 9th Circuit PANEL (emphasis mine)
Without a doubt, the full court will review the case en banc and toss this ruling out on its ear. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| No kingdom can be secured otherwise than by arming the people. The possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave. He, who has nothing, and who himself belongs to another, must be defended by him, whose property he is, and needs no arms. But he, who thinks he is his own master, and has what he can call his own, ought to have arms to defend himself, and what he possesses; else he lives precariously, and at discretion. — James Burgh, Political Disquisitions: Or, an Enquiry into Public Errors, Defects, and Abuses [London, 1774-1775]. |
|
|
