The ridiculous 9th circuit today ruled that Hawaii has a right to deny people concealed carry licenses if they can’t prove an ‘urgency or need’ to carry a firearm:
BREAKING: The US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit just ruled that THERE IS NO RIGHT TO CARRY – either openly or concealed in public.
This ruling impacts RTC laws in AK, HI, CA, AZ, OR, WA, & MT.
This was not an NRA case but we are exploring all options to rectify this.
— NRA (@NRA) March 24, 2021
Here’s more from DAILY CALLER:
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a Hawaii gun regulation, ruling Wednesday that states can restrict the right to openly carry a firearm in public.
The 7-4 decision said restrictions on carrying guns in public do not fall within the scope of what is protected by the Second Amendment.
“The government may regulate, and even prohibit, in public places – including government buildings, churches, schools, and markets – the open carrying of small arms capable of being concealed, whether they are carried concealed or openly,” Judge Jay Bybee wrote for the majority.
The majority based their decision on previous rulings and a review of both American and English law.
“We have never assumed that individuals have an unfettered right to carry weapons in public spaces,” the majority ruled. “Indeed, we can find no general right to carry arms into the public square for self defense.”
“The en banc court held that the Second Amendment does not guarantee an unfettered, general right to openly carry arms in public for individual self-defense. Accordingly, Hawaii’s firearms-carry scheme is lawful.”
The case was brought by George Young, who applied for a license twice in 2011 to carry a gun in public either openly or concealed and was denied both times because he didn’t prove the “urgency or the need” to openly carry a firearm in public, the decision said. Instead, Young relied on his “general desire to carry a firearm for self-defense.”
Under Hawaii’s law, residents have to show the “urgency or the need” to carry a firearm in public and must be of good moral character and “engaged in the protection of life and property.”
Young sued, arguing the “denial of his application for a handgun license violated his Second Amendment right to carry a loaded handgun in public for self-defense.”
The court said the question was “whether individuals have a right to carry weapons openly in public.” The court reviewed the Supreme Court’s decision in both District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. City of Chicago and found “Hawaii’s restrictions on the open carrying of firearms reflect longstanding prohibitions and that the conduct they regulate is therefore outside the historical scope of the Second Amendment.”
“We have previously held that individuals do not have a Second Amendment right to carry concealed weapons in public,” the court also added. The 9th Circuit previously ruled in 2016 that there is no constitutional right to carry a concealed weapon in public.
This ruling is dumb on its face. The idea that the founders envisioned that someone can only protect themselves when they are at home is absurd.
The second amendment says “…the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” It doesn’t say the right of the people to keep and bear arms AT HOME or ON PRIVATE PROPERTY. In fact it doesn’t give any such restriction, and for the 9th circuit to continually provide such extra-constitutional restrictions just proves how much reform it truly needs. There are far too many Clinton, Obama, and Bush judges on the 9th circuit that need replacing.