BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE HAWAII RIFLE ASSOCIATION; CALIFORNIA RIFLE & PISTOL ASSOCI (Read 756 times)

Charles Nichols

The first two quotes are from the Amicus brief:

"While government can regulate the public bearing of arms, it cannot ban it. District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 628-29 (2008). States must provide some outlet for average citizens to exercise the right to publicly bear arms, whether openly or concealed."

"The critical point, reiterated in each of these cases [19th-century case law], is that “the right to bear arms must guarantee some right to self-defense in public.”


The critical point from the 19th-century case law is that concealed carry is vile, evil, and it is only when firearms are openly carried can they be effectively used for self-defense.  The latter being the holding of the only 19th-century court to consider the hypothetical case of banning Open Carry in favor of concealed carry (Reid).  How do we know?  Because they said so.

It is impossible to read the Heller decision to say that Open Carry can be banned in favor of concealed carry.

The Heller decision also said that the mentally ill do not have a right to keep and bear arms.  If someone can read the Heller decision, and the 19th-century cases it cited that "perfectly captured" the meaning of the right to keep and bear arms (Nunn, Likewise Chandler) to say that Open Carry can be banned in favor of concealed carry, and truly believe that then they suffer from a mental disease or defect that places them outside the protections of the Second Amendment.