Ninth Circuit Goes Back to English Law in the Middle Ages, Says Pre-U.S. Law in Hawaii Allows State’s Open Carry Restrictions
A federal court denied a challenge to Hawaii’s prohibition on the open carry of firearms in a lengthy and scholarly opinion released Wednesday — finding that Hawaiian law and practice both predate and supersede a broad application of the Second Amendment.
“Hawai‘i law began limiting public carriage of dangerous weapons, including firearms, more than 150 years ago — nearly fifty years before it became a U.S. territory and more than a century before it became a state,” the opinion explains in language foreshadowing the method of inquiry and eventual ruling in favor of anti-gun regulation.
So we now make Constitutional decisions that restrict the Second Amendment based ignoring the Bill of Rights!
"The thorough (and admittedly non-exhaustive) historical inquiry, necessarily long and time-consuming, begins by invoking 'a series of orders to local sheriffs that prohibited ‘going armed’ without the king’s permission' which were promulgated by “King Edward I and his successor, King Edward II.” The final laws cited in this section are two explicit prohibitions on the public carrying of firearms which were upheld by the Arkansas Supreme Court in 1876 and 1882."?
That means the very reason for the Second Amendment -- the British King's efforts to deny Americans our right to keep and bear arms (as in Concord and Lexington) becomes precedent to ignore the Amendment!
This absurdity is followed by a reconstruction era Arkansas court, before the 14th Amendment jurisprudence developed, denying the right. What remains of the Amendment if I cannot go about armed?
The alleged conservative majority on the Supreme Court needs to clearly announce that our individual right to keep and bear arms trumps state restrictions, no matter how old the legal error which allowed them may be. Once we had a Federal Common Law until SCOTUS said it never was...
No comments:
Post a Comment