• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Firearms outside the home

Edward Peruta

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2007
Messages
1,247
Location
Connecticut USA
More will follow:

The Seventh Circuit has rendered a decsion that states in part:
Read the Chicago Tribune article at this link:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...,7034171.story

or the actual decison at this link:

http://gallery.mailchimp.com/1ef541..._Madigan_Opinion_Reversed_and_Remanded_2_.pdf


We are disinclined to engage in another round of historical
analysis to determine whether eighteenth-century
America understood the Second Amendment to include
a right to bear guns outside the home. The Supreme
Court has decided that the amendment confers
a right to bear arms for self-defense, which is as
important outside the home as inside. The theoretical
and empirical evidence (which overall is inconclusive)
is consistent with concluding that a right to
carry firearms in public may promote self-defense.
Illinois
had to provide us with more than merely a rational basis
for believing that its uniquely sweeping ban is justified
by an increase in public safety. It has failed to meet
this burden. The Supreme Court’s interpretation of
the Second Amendment therefore compels us to reverse
the decisions in the two cases before us and remand
them to their respective district courts for the entry
of dec la ra tions of unconstitutionality and
permanent injunctions. Nevertheless we order our mandate
stayed for 180 days to allow the Illinois
legislature to craft a new gun law that will
impose reasonable limitations, consistent with the public
safety and the Second Amendment as interpreted in
this opinion, on the carrying of guns in public.
 
Last edited:

motoxmann

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2012
Messages
760
Location
Middletown, CT
This is great news! It will be interesting to see what the new gun law will be in 180 days - hopefully not too restrictive. One step at a time...

x2!!!
though I'm sure they'll try to find a way to legally set more restrictions than even NYS currently has for locations carrying is legal as well as factors in issuing permits.

on a side note, I think it's stupid how NYS nearly requires a person to prove they NEED a gun in order to obtain a permit. I mean come oooooon! of all victims of violence where the victims are non-criminals but rather are responsible law abiding citizens, what percentage of them do you think actually knew in advance they would definitely be a victim of violence? it should be the other way around: if you know you'll be a victim, don't go to that location, or stay away from that person, or do everything you can to avoid that type of situation. the whole point of having a gun for self defense is because you DON'T know if or when you could ever potentially be a victim, but rather to be prepared just in case, because it's usually when you least expect it, in the most awkward of places
 
Top