Never before in our history has there been so much discussion, debate, and laws about what can and can’t be done in regard to owning and carrying firearms. It is constant and it is all over the map in what different constituents want in this hot topic. But maybe there is a chance we will get back to our roots and revive the 2nd Amendment that was supposed to be part of what the country is all about…just maybe.
There was a great article in Bloomberg recently that talked about this very subject and the potential impact a court ruling in California, of all places, may have on the country. What’s at stake? The opportunity for millions of Americans to walk around with concealed firearms. The case is paramount in determining if this will happen and set a precedent for others to follow and allow “law-abiding citizens to carry firearms as described under the 2nd Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
The article I am referring to, “You Want to Go Out With Your Colt. Will America Let You?” is the one that does a great job of summarizing what is happening in California. In case you don’t have time to read the entire article, let me give you a quick summary of a couple paragraphs from it…
“The sheriff in San Diego rejected Peruta’s application for a permit to take his Colt 1911 .45 caliber pistol while traveling with cash and expensive equipment in high-crime California neighborhoods. He sued, and a three-judge panel of a federal appeals court ruled in February that any responsible, law-abiding citizen is entitled under the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment to possess a concealed firearm in public for self-defense.”
“A victory for Peruta at the high court could reverse that trend and be used to attack strict public-carry laws in New York City, Boston, Baltimore and Washington. That would expand the number of people with concealed guns on city streets to as much as 5 percent, according to Adam Winkler, a law professor at the University of California at Los Angeles. ‘It would mean that the discretionary permitting process in many major cities would be invalidated,’ Winkler said. ‘You’re absolutely talking about millions more people having permits to carry guns.’”
Both sides of this argument are jumping into full action right now and doing everything they can to support their views before this if finalized. But one of the big, and often hidden, issues in this is the word “discretion.” In 10 states they have “discretion” about granting or denying concealed carry permits. They are known and the “may-issue” states and as such, leaves it up to the whim of the officials in the state. But it goes well beyond just impacting these 10 states, it would have an impact in every state. If you added 5% more people carrying firearms, that would be significant.
I loved the quote from Peruta’s attorney who was commenting that more criminals would be deterred if they knew more people were carrying their own guns…because you wouldn’t know who had them and who didn’t. He said, “No one is going duck hunting when 5 percent of the ducks might shoot back.”
What do you think of this situation? Do you feel it is time to revive the 2nd Amendment and allow people to carry concealed firearms? Share your thoughts…either side of the argument is fine, it’s an open discussion.