Any admin, please delete if you wish.
Search found 3 matches
Return to “SCOTUS 2A Decision Outside Home Carry”
- Mon Mar 21, 2016 9:55 pm
- Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
- Topic: SCOTUS 2A Decision Outside Home Carry
- Replies: 5
- Views: 1621
Re: SCOTUS 2A Decision Outside Home Carry
Tried to edit and accidentally double posted.
Any admin, please delete if you wish.
Any admin, please delete if you wish.
- Mon Mar 21, 2016 9:44 pm
- Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
- Topic: SCOTUS 2A Decision Outside Home Carry
- Replies: 5
- Views: 1621
Re: SCOTUS 2A Decision Outside Home Carry
SA-TX wrote:Read the decision here
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15 ... 8_aplc.pdf
It involves a stun gun not a firearm but it is per curium , decided squarely on 2A grounds, for carry outside the home and the concurrence by Thomas and Alito quite pointed at the court below.
The decision overturns a decision by the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts that upheld the conviction of an abused women (who had restraining orders on an ex) when it was found in her car. MA law apparently banned them categorically and the decision says this contravenes Heller and deprives her of her choice of a self-defense tool.
The fact that this is a less-popular choice than a firearm was, interestingly, used by the MA court in upholding her conviction (supposedly positing that she SHOULD have turned to a firearm) but the Court reiterated their prior statements and concluded that a stun gun most certainly enjoys 2A protection.
What does this mean for handguns? Someone much more qualified than I needs to answer this. At a minimum, it seems to focus on the "bear" instead of the "keep" part of "keep and bear arms" which Heller did not, so this seems to be a positive development.
SA-TX
- Mon Mar 21, 2016 9:43 pm
- Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
- Topic: SCOTUS 2A Decision Outside Home Carry
- Replies: 5
- Views: 1621
SCOTUS 2A Decision Outside Home Carry
Read the decision here
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15 ... 8_aplc.pdf
It involves a stun gun not a firearm but it is per curium , decided squarely on 2A grounds, for carry outside the home and the concurrence by Thomas and Alito quite pointed at the court below.
The decision overturns a decision by the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts that upheld the conviction of an abused women (who had restraining orders on an ex) when it was found in her car. MA law apparently banned them categorically and the decision says this contravenes Heller and deprives her of her choice of a self-defense tool.
The fact that this is a less-popular choice than a firearm was, interestingly, used by the MA court in upholding her conviction (supposedly positing that she SHOULD have turned to a firearm) but the Court reiterated their prior statements and concluded that a stun gun most certainly enjoys 2A protection.
What does this mean for handguns? Someone much more qualified than I needs to answer this. At a minimum, it seems to focus on the "bear" instead of the "keep" part of "keep and bear arms" which Heller did not, so this seems to be a positive development.
SA-TX
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15 ... 8_aplc.pdf
It involves a stun gun not a firearm but it is per curium , decided squarely on 2A grounds, for carry outside the home and the concurrence by Thomas and Alito quite pointed at the court below.
The decision overturns a decision by the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts that upheld the conviction of an abused women (who had restraining orders on an ex) when it was found in her car. MA law apparently banned them categorically and the decision says this contravenes Heller and deprives her of her choice of a self-defense tool.
The fact that this is a less-popular choice than a firearm was, interestingly, used by the MA court in upholding her conviction (supposedly positing that she SHOULD have turned to a firearm) but the Court reiterated their prior statements and concluded that a stun gun most certainly enjoys 2A protection.
What does this mean for handguns? Someone much more qualified than I needs to answer this. At a minimum, it seems to focus on the "bear" instead of the "keep" part of "keep and bear arms" which Heller did not, so this seems to be a positive development.
SA-TX