Long Island Shooters Forum banner
1 - 20 of 60 Posts

·
That Guy
Joined
·
11,504 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
NRA Will Appeal Texas Concealed Handgun Case

Friday, January 20, 2012

NRA will appeal yesterday's decision by a federal court in Texas, which held that the Second Amendment does not protect any right to keep or bear arms outside the home.

The decision, handed down by U.S. District Judge Sam Cummings of the Northern District of Texas, came in the case of Jennings v. McCraw, in which a group of law-abiding 18- to 20-year old adults challenged the state law prohibiting issuance of concealed handgun licenses to persons under 21, who are treated as adults for virtually every other purpose under the law. (NRA is also a party on behalf of its members in this age group.) Judge Cummings ruled that it was unnecessary to address the state's discrimination against young adults because "the right to carry a handgun outside of the home … seems to be beyond the scope of the core Second Amendment concern articulated in Heller [v. District of Columbia]."

Unfortunately, this is only the most recent of several court decisions that have misread Heller in that way. Heller, of course, only directly addressed gun possession in the home, for a very simple reason: The plaintiffs in that case only challenged Washington, D.C.'s limits on possession in the home, rather than its restrictions on carrying firearms outside the home.

More importantly, the Supreme Court in Heller never said the Second Amendment does not apply outside the home. Rather, it said that the home is the place "where the need for defense of self, family, and property is most acute"-implying that there are other places where the need may be less acute, but still exists. Likewise, the Court suggested that it would uphold bans on carrying guns in "sensitive places"-which implies that carrying in places that are not "sensitive" would be protected under the Second Amendment.

The NRA will appeal the Jennings decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, and to the Supreme Court if necessary. Although the Supreme Court recently declined to hear two cases addressing the right to bear arms outside the home, several others are working their way through the courts. These include the NRA-supported cases of Peruta v. County of San Diego, which challenges discriminatory permit issuance under California law and Shepard v. Madigan, challenging Illinois' complete denial of any lawful way to carry firearms for self-defense outside one's home or place of business. Peruta is pending in the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals and Shepard is awaiting action in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois.

For the latest news on these and other NRA-supported cases and to subscribe to our online Legal Update newsletter, go to www.nraila.org/legalupdate.​


Well some might agree with me but I think the judge might be right. Now let me say this some 18 to 20 year olds are mature enough to carry but I know more 21 to 23 year olds that aren't mature enough to to hold a job so this leaves us with a big debate.
 

·
That Guy
Joined
·
11,504 Posts
Discussion Starter · #2 ·
NRA Will Appeal Texas Concealed Handgun Case

Friday, January 20, 2012

NRA will appeal yesterday's decision by a federal court in Texas, which held that the Second Amendment does not protect any right to keep or bear arms outside the home.

The decision, handed down by U.S. District Judge Sam Cummings of the Northern District of Texas, came in the case of Jennings v. McCraw, in which a group of law-abiding 18- to 20-year old adults challenged the state law prohibiting issuance of concealed handgun licenses to persons under 21, who are treated as adults for virtually every other purpose under the law. (NRA is also a party on behalf of its members in this age group.) Judge Cummings ruled that it was unnecessary to address the state's discrimination against young adults because "the right to carry a handgun outside of the home … seems to be beyond the scope of the core Second Amendment concern articulated in Heller [v. District of Columbia]."

Unfortunately, this is only the most recent of several court decisions that have misread Heller in that way. Heller, of course, only directly addressed gun possession in the home, for a very simple reason: The plaintiffs in that case only challenged Washington, D.C.'s limits on possession in the home, rather than its restrictions on carrying firearms outside the home.

More importantly, the Supreme Court in Heller never said the Second Amendment does not apply outside the home. Rather, it said that the home is the place "where the need for defense of self, family, and property is most acute"-implying that there are other places where the need may be less acute, but still exists. Likewise, the Court suggested that it would uphold bans on carrying guns in "sensitive places"-which implies that carrying in places that are not "sensitive" would be protected under the Second Amendment.

The NRA will appeal the Jennings decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, and to the Supreme Court if necessary. Although the Supreme Court recently declined to hear two cases addressing the right to bear arms outside the home, several others are working their way through the courts. These include the NRA-supported cases of Peruta v. County of San Diego, which challenges discriminatory permit issuance under California law and Shepard v. Madigan, challenging Illinois' complete denial of any lawful way to carry firearms for self-defense outside one's home or place of business. Peruta is pending in the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals and Shepard is awaiting action in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois.

For the latest news on these and other NRA-supported cases and to subscribe to our online Legal Update newsletter, go to www.nraila.org/legalupdate.​


Well some might agree with me but I think the judge might be right. Now let me say this some 18 to 20 year olds are mature enough to carry but I know more 21 to 23 year olds that aren't mature enough to to hold a job so this leaves us with a big debate.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,551 Posts
You can die in a foreign sh--hole for your country at 18, but can't protect yourself at home!

Dov
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,551 Posts
You can die in a foreign sh--hole for your country at 18, but can't protect yourself at home!

Dov
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,853 Posts
zzrguy said:
Well some might agree with me but I think the judge might be right. Now let me say this some 18 to 20 year olds are mature enough to carry but I know more 21 to 23 year olds that are mature enough to to hold a job so this leaves us with a big debate.
I'll agree that most aroud my age are not mature enough to carry a firearm, but that is not the issue.

It's not about maturity, it's about natural birth rights.

Do the other Amendments, in the bill of rights, only apply once you hit 21?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,853 Posts
zzrguy said:
Well some might agree with me but I think the judge might be right. Now let me say this some 18 to 20 year olds are mature enough to carry but I know more 21 to 23 year olds that are mature enough to to hold a job so this leaves us with a big debate.
I'll agree that most aroud my age are not mature enough to carry a firearm, but that is not the issue.

It's not about maturity, it's about natural birth rights.

Do the other Amendments, in the bill of rights, only apply once you hit 21?
 

·
SUPER STAR
Joined
·
5,508 Posts
psydaddy said:
You can die in a foreign sh--hole for your country at 18, but can't protect yourself at home!

Dov
The problem is this......most 18-21 year old kids are not mature enough to carry a gun. Its that simple.

BTW, alot of states have the 21 year old restriction....many states including NY drop the 21 year old restriction if you served in the Armed Forces.
 

·
SUPER STAR
Joined
·
5,508 Posts
psydaddy said:
You can die in a foreign sh--hole for your country at 18, but can't protect yourself at home!

Dov
The problem is this......most 18-21 year old kids are not mature enough to carry a gun. Its that simple.

BTW, alot of states have the 21 year old restriction....many states including NY drop the 21 year old restriction if you served in the Armed Forces.
 

·
That Guy
Joined
·
11,504 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Jake said:
I'll agree that most aroud my age are not mature enough to carry a firearm, but that is not the issue.

It's not about maturity, it's about natural birth rights.

Do the other Amendments, in the bill of rights, only apply once you hit 21?
I would argue that the founding fathers would look at the state of our youths and fell that a case by case system along with training would be best. I am not talking about owning a handgun but carrying it in public..
 

·
That Guy
Joined
·
11,504 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
Jake said:
I'll agree that most aroud my age are not mature enough to carry a firearm, but that is not the issue.

It's not about maturity, it's about natural birth rights.

Do the other Amendments, in the bill of rights, only apply once you hit 21?
I would argue that the founding fathers would look at the state of our youths and fell that a case by case system along with training would be best. I am not talking about owning a handgun but carrying it in public..
 

·
That Guy
Joined
·
11,504 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
I WILL STAND BY THIS STATEMENT IF YOU CARRYING IN PUBLIC YOU NEED TO BE TRAINED...

If you don't think that you are going to need training and insurance to carry you are nuts if H822 go throw the anti gunners will have this stipulation tack on faster then you can Smith & Wesson.
 

·
That Guy
Joined
·
11,504 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
I WILL STAND BY THIS STATEMENT IF YOU CARRYING IN PUBLIC YOU NEED TO BE TRAINED...

If you don't think that you are going to need training and insurance to carry you are nuts if H822 go throw the anti gunners will have this stipulation tack on faster then you can Smith & Wesson.
 

·
Anti-Statist
Joined
·
5,359 Posts
psydaddy said:
You can die in a foreign sh--hole for your country at 18, but can't protect yourself at home!
You can do that at 21+ as well, but in NY, NJ, MD, CA, you can't protect yourself either.

The key issue here is the fact that the courts need to see, or be forced to see via legislation, that the 2nd amendment applies outside of ones home. What part of "keep and bear arms" do they not understand?
 

·
Anti-Statist
Joined
·
5,359 Posts
psydaddy said:
You can die in a foreign sh--hole for your country at 18, but can't protect yourself at home!
You can do that at 21+ as well, but in NY, NJ, MD, CA, you can't protect yourself either.

The key issue here is the fact that the courts need to see, or be forced to see via legislation, that the 2nd amendment applies outside of ones home. What part of "keep and bear arms" do they not understand?
 

·
Sifting Through the Ruins
Joined
·
7,979 Posts
You guys so far have missed the import of the court decision. The federal Judge never reached the issue of 18 vs. 21. His disturbing, short sighted opinion held thet the 2nd Amendment DID NOT apply outside of the home, so carry for 18 year olds, or anybody else(!) is subject to prohibition should the state choose.
 

·
Sifting Through the Ruins
Joined
·
7,979 Posts
You guys so far have missed the import of the court decision. The federal Judge never reached the issue of 18 vs. 21. His disturbing, short sighted opinion held thet the 2nd Amendment DID NOT apply outside of the home, so carry for 18 year olds, or anybody else(!) is subject to prohibition should the state choose.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,263 Posts
grifhunter said:
You guys so far have missed the import of the court decision. The federal Judge never reached the issue of 18 vs. 21. His disturbing, short sighted opinion held thet the 2nd Amendment DID NOT apply outside of the home, so carry for 18 year olds, or anybody else(!) is subject to prohibition should the state choose.
Yes you are right and forget the 18-21 thing that judge ruled that the 2nd does not apply outside the home for anyone. This case will be the anti new war cry
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,263 Posts
grifhunter said:
You guys so far have missed the import of the court decision. The federal Judge never reached the issue of 18 vs. 21. His disturbing, short sighted opinion held thet the 2nd Amendment DID NOT apply outside of the home, so carry for 18 year olds, or anybody else(!) is subject to prohibition should the state choose.
Yes you are right and forget the 18-21 thing that judge ruled that the 2nd does not apply outside the home for anyone. This case will be the anti new war cry
 
1 - 20 of 60 Posts
Top