Using the 14th Amendment to apply gay marriage to all states that did not want it, does that not also provide precedent to apply shall-issue CCW to those 7 or 8 remaining "discretionary" CCW states that are still dragging their heels on the issue?
I am going to guess No. I think the Supreme Court at this point is satisfied that there is some reasonable mechanism in place for a concealed weapon in all fifty states. Some of the discretionary states have honored the ability for some to carry a lot longer than some of the shall issue states have.
It depends. Four of the Justices are adamantly anti-2A and on the record to dismantle the RKBA. If a democrat President, before or after 2016, gets to add more anti-2A Justices to the Supreme Court we won't see pro-2A decisions for a very long time. Expect to see 2A reversals. After 2016, If a republican President gets to add more pro-2A Justices than we'll more likely see pro-2A decisions.
I do NOT want the federal government forcing states to go shall-issue. That's a bad thing.
Do you REALLY want the federal government forcing states to violate our Rights by requiring a license to carry a gun??
Now, if the SCOTUS were to strike down may issue due to some kind of discriminatory or uneven application, etc, I'll go for that. The details of what is done/how it's done matter, a lot.
Details...like I said...forcing/requiring shall issue is in fact forcing states to violate our Right to keep and bear arms. We could go for forcing Constitutional carry, as we know it to be called, or simply saying that you can't do May Issue...but requiring a permit even if it's "shall issue" is still an explicit and direction violation to the Bill of Rights.
I agree with this, but if the states would take their rightful position in all this, it doesn't matter what SCOTUS has an opinion on. It's a states right issue as long as it doesn't violate the constitution/ bill of rights and the feds don't step out of the enumerated powers...but we know how that's gone!!!
Using the 14th Amendment to apply gay marriage to all states that did not want it, does that not also provide precedent to apply shall-issue CCW to those 7 or 8 remaining "discretionary" CCW states that are still dragging their heels on the issue?
It wont be interpreted in a way to increase gun rights. It does not meet the political agenda of the current Court.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Glock Talk
21M posts
185.2K members
Since 1999
A forum community dedicated to Glock firearm owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about optics, gunsmithing, styles, reviews, troubleshooting, accessories, classifieds, and more!