Breyer's opinion would seem to indicate that Concealed Carry restrictions are OK, so that means....
Texas, Arkansas, Florida, Oklahoma, et al.
I mean really, how can you require people to pay (Concealed carry permit fee) to exercise a fundamental right??
Live Free or Die,
Open Carry is the right. We all know it is.
I was having a good day. Why did you have to mention the NRA?
I don't think it will fly but of course we (gun owners) will have to pry every single bastardized attempt to continue the unconstitutional defacto bans that the anti's just can't admit that they can't have.
Cry me a river Danny boy. You're going to have LEGAL guns in Chicago again.
And yeah, why did someone have to mention the damn NRA? Grrrrrr
although heller and mcdonald opinions have both cited that 'reasonable regulations' are allowed, how does that square with laws that require licenses, fees, or taxes considering Murdoch v. commonwealth of PA?
I really enjoy this part from Murdock v. Pennsylvania:
"This tax is not a charge for the enjoyment of a privilege or benefit bestowed by the state. The privilege in question exists apart from state authority. It is guaranteed the people by the federal constitution."
"The privilege in question exists apart from state authority." I'm thinking of sending this to everyone I know.....
Ooo. That suggests a nifty little rhetorical device. Daley (and Fenty, and...) are behind the times, clinging to old traditions. Resisting change. The pendulum of human progress has swung further and people have another civil right recognized.
Dinosaur Daley. Stuck in the past---the bad old days of gun control, when governments made their citizens vulnerable to criminals. Before reason overcame the superstition that criminals would be deterred by anti-gun laws. That time in our benighted past when old men had to risk prison to protect their family.
So when is Daley up for re-election. If I were plannng a campaign strategy against him, I'd hammer him over and over on this issue.
I'd run spots pointing out the 2 recent incidents in which Chicago citizens successfully defended themselves with firearms that are technically illegal under Chicago law. Then I'd point out that Daley chose NOT to prosecute them. Why? Because he knows the truth - that legally armed citizens CAN do this. Then say, "Daley wants you, the citizens of Chicago, to be defenseless and at the mercy of every doped-up street thug in town."
Of course, this would require a Chicago politicain to run on a pro-gun platform, but a fella can dream, right?
Which, in my state (CO) makes absolutely NO sense whatsoever when it's perfectly legal to OC without having to pay a penny.