The Right Coast

Editor: Thomas A. Smith
University of San Diego
School of Law

Thursday, November 8, 2018

First Circuit Court of Appeals Rule No Right to Bear Arms Outside the Home

On 2 November 2018, the First Circuit Court of Appeals held the Second Amendment effectively does not apply outside the home.  From uscourts.gov:

This case involves a constitutional challenge to the Massachusetts firearms licensing statute, as implemented in the communities of Boston and Brookline. All of the individual plaintiffs sought and received licenses from one of those two communities to carry firearms in public. The licenses, though, were restricted: they allowed the plaintiffs to carry firearms only in relation to certain specified activities but denied them the right to carry firearms more generally. 

The plaintiffs say that the Massachusetts firearms licensing statute, as implemented in Boston and Brookline, violates the Second Amendment. The district court disagreed, and so do we. Mindful that “the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited,” District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 626 (2008), we hold that the challenged regime bears a substantial relationship to important governmental interests in promoting public safety and crime prevention without offending the plaintiffs' Second Amendment rights. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's entry of summary judgment for the defendants. In the last analysis, the plaintiffs simply do not have the right” to carry arms for any sort of confrontation” or “for whatever purpose” they may choose. Id. at 595, 626 (emphasis omitted). 

via www.ammoland.com

https://rightcoast.typepad.com/rightcoast/2018/11/first-circuit-court-of-appeals-rule-no-right-to-bear-arms-outside-the-home.html

| Permalink

Comments

Bollocks. If the right to bear arms is related to the idea that every able-bodied adult male is automatically part of the militia, then the right can't possibly be confined to "outside the home".

Maybe if the left is to continue to invent any old constitutional doctrine it wants, Trump should push ahead with his own invention on the subject of birthright citizenship. It would be horribly crooked but maybe justified on the "sauce for the goose" principle.

So much for a Constitutional Republic.

Posted by: dearieme | Nov 8, 2018 12:03:28 PM

Post a comment