Many believe that gun control is a court decision away, but can the enforcement of the second amendment really make America safer? It is true that according to the second amendment of the U.S. Constitution, Americans have the “right to bear arms.” What has escaped the comprehension of most until now is that having the right to own a gun and having the right to walk the streets with a gun are not the same thing. In many state and local courts, new amendments are being put in place, which will allow residents who have “good reason” to be able to carry concealed guns in public, but the feds have stepped in to make things right.
The U.S. Court of Appeals has temporarily waived rulings that make it okay for certain residents to carry a concealed gun in public, according to the Washington Post. The feds claim recent gun laws set by state and local courts in New Jersey, New York, California, and Maryland are unconstitutional. Judge William Fletcher of the 9th circuit recently made an official statement, revealing the misinterpretation of the law by these states.
“We hold that the Second Amendment does not preserve or protect a right of a member of the general public to carry concealed firearms in public.”
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has, in some ways, overstepped by overruling the decision of local courts. Because these state and local courts have the right to challenge the decision of a higher court, this fight could ultimately end up in the Supreme Court. The state expected to fight the hardest to overturn the 9th circuit is California.
In San Diego, a judge just ruled that it was okay for some residents to carry guns in public if they had a strong fear for their safety. The ruling was mainly meant for celebrities who make up a large portion of California’s population and frequently find themselves in life-threatening situations at the hands of fans. The judge in the San Diego case, Consuelo M. Callahan, made the following statement.
“In the context of present-day California law, the Defendant counties’ limited licensing of the right to carry concealed firearms is tantamount to a total ban on the right of an ordinary citizen to carry a firearm in public for self-defense.”
The main problem with these state and local court rulings is that they all go against the laws of their higher court. In forty-two U.S. states, residents are required to have a permit to own a gun but still are not permitted to carry their registered gun in public. In the remaining eight states (Alaska, Maine, Vermont, Kansas, Idaho and Arizona) it is legal to carry a concealed weapon, including firearms. California belongs to the forty-two states in which a permit is required for gun ownership and it is considered illegal to carry a concealed weapon.
Despite the passing of San Diego’s unconstitutional gun law, Californians, specifically California gun rights organizations, are advocating for the 9th circuit U.S. Courts of Appeals to be overturned. President of the California Rifle and Pistol Association, C.D. “Chuck” Michel, was the most vocal in this case, making a derogatory statement against the 9th circuit.
“Once again the 9th Circuit showed how out of touch it is with mainstream Americans. This decision will leave good people defenseless, as it completely ignores the fact that law-abiding Californians who reside in counties with hostile sheriffs will now have no means to carry a firearm outside the home for personal protection.”
[Photo by Erich Schlegel/Stringer/Getty Images]