Taxpayer Association of Oregon
The 9th Circuit Court of the United States just ruled that there is no constitutional right to carry a firearm in a recent ruling on firearms.
Reason magazine explained the decision, “Combined with a 2016 decision involving concealed firearms, the ruling means that the Second Amendment does not extend beyond the home for residents of the 9th Circuit, which includes Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington.”
Page 112-113 of the Court’s ruling are the most telling:
“We recognize that, although there have been few technological advances in the last centuries in dirks, daggers, slung shots, and brass knuckles, there clearly have been advances in the manufacture of pistols and revolvers. Heller
observed that today the handgun is “an entire class of ‘arms’ that is overwhelmingly chosen by American society for . . .[a] lawful purpose.” Heller, 554 U.S. at 628. Notwithstanding the advances in handgun technology, and their increasing popularity, pistols and revolvers remain among the class of deadly weapons that are easily transported and concealed. That they may be used for defense does not change their threat to the “king’s peace.”
It remains as true today as it was centuries ago, that the mere presence of such weapons presents a terror to the public and that widespread carrying of handguns would strongly suggest that state and local governments have lost control of our public areas.
Technology has not altered those very human Understandings.
We may, of course, change our conception of what we need to do to protect ourselves. The Constitution does not impose the Statute of Northampton on the states. But the Second Amendment did not contradict the fundamental principle that the government assumes primary responsibility for defending persons who enter our public spaces. The states do not violate the Second Amendment by asserting their longstanding English and American rights to prohibit certain weapons from entering those public spaces as means of providing “domestic Tranquility” and forestalling “domestic Violence.”
Click here for the full ruling: https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2021/03/24/12-17808.pdf
Was this helpful? If yes, support our efforts with a simple $15 donation at OregonWatchdog.com (learn about a Charitable Tax Deduction or Political Tax Credit options to promote liberty).