A pertinent question might be:  are those courts stuffed with judges that out of sync or ignorant of Constitutional law?

Or, are they just political hacks doing the business the oligarchy wants them to do?

In a perfect world in a court that uses the constitution to decide a case then every Justice should vote the same way. Forgetting political affiliation. But you and I both know the Democrats started packing the courts with judges who rule by emotion/heart rather than strictly down the law. And then justices were appointed that just don’t care. They are Democrats and the party and their agenda comes first. So take it as you see it. They are political hacks that don’t pay attention to that out of date document.

Well im 28 so im hopeful that i can constitutionally open carry at the ripe old age of 78 

You can Constitutionally open carry today, just be prepared to shoot some cops.
Concealed carry is better, that way they won't bug you so much.  AND try not 
to give them reason to search you.
Keep a lawyer on speed dial.
If you actually have to defend yourself, don't stick around.
They don't give a fuk about the Constitution,  why should you care
about their laws based on Party beliefs?
Aloha.

These stats are from Politifact and their left wing sources so take these with a grain of salt, however. Also, these numbers are 4-5 years old so they be slightly different now. I do believe these to be correct or close enough from my memory of a couple of years ago. I would think that 79% is a very high percentage of rulings turned over by SCOTUS.

The 9th Circuit’s reversal rate is higher than average, but it’s not the absolute highest among the circuit courts. That distinction goes to the 6th Circuit, which serves Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky and Tennessee, with an 87 percent average between 2010-15.  The 9th Circuit is in third place.

1. 6th Circuit - 87 percent;

2. 11th Circuit - 85 percent;

3. 9th Circuit - 79 percent;

4. 3rd Circuit - 78 percent;

5. 2nd Circuit and Federal Circuit - 68 percent;

6. 8th Circuit - 67 percent;

7. 5th Circuit - 66 percent;

8. 7th Circuit - 48 percent;

9. DC Circuit - 45 percent;

10. 1st Circuit and 4th Circuit - 43 percent;

11. 10th Circuit - 42 percent.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2017/feb/10/sean-hannity/no-9th-circuit-isnt-most-overturned-court-country-/

Good data.  Either RobtMC is correct about the courts' bias, OR (my opinion) the SCOTUS only agrees to hear cases that appear on their face to be incorrect.  So, if they only allow bad decisions to be heard, then of course the majority of them are highly likely to be overturned -- assuming the parties challenging the rulings have smart-enough lawyers.

Just my view of how the percentages might be so high.  Since so few cases are actually chose to be heard by SCOTUS, it seems to make sense.

The take-away from those stats ought not be "How did SCOTUS select the cases?"  It ought tp be, "How in hell's name did the lower courts fuck up so many times?"  Percentages of overturned cases compared to the number heard by SCOTUS looks high.  What does the percentage of cases overturned compared to the number ruled on by the lower court look like?  How many cases has the 9th Circus reversed in favor of the people challenging the state?

I always wonder what's behind the percentages.  Those numbers (ratios) are often presented to show a larger than expected number when the raw data isn't so Yuuuuge.

"I made 80% more this year selling widgets than last year."

"I sold 9 widgets this year -- 4 more than the 5 I sold last year."

"80%" sounds much better than "9" or "4 more."

OR (my opinion) the SCOTUS only agrees to hear cases that appear on their face to be incorrect. 

Good point.

I always wonder what's behind the percentages.  Those numbers (ratios) are often presented to show a larger than expected number when the raw data isn't so Yuuuuge.

"I made 80% more this year selling widgets than last year."

"I sold 9 widgets this year -- 4 more than the 5 I sold last year."

"80%" sounds much better than "9" or "4 more."

I use similar when lifting.  I did double the amount of reps that I did last week.  Did 1 rep last week, and 2 this week.

https://www.civilbeat.org/?p=1435480

"Beck said he plans to appeal the case further to the U.S. Supreme Court. He says the 9th Circuit decision has caused a split among how the federal circuits interpret gun laws. That alone, he says, should be reason for the nation's highest court to take up the case.
The Second Amendment can't mean one thing in California, in Texas it means something else, and then in Tennessee something differently entirely," Beck said.

https://www.civilbeat.org/?p=1435480

"Beck said he plans to appeal the case further to the U.S. Supreme Court. He says the 9th Circuit decision has caused a split among how the federal circuits interpret gun laws. That alone, he says, should be reason for the nation's highest court to take up the case.
The Second Amendment can't mean one thing in California, in Texas it means something else, and then in Tennessee something differently entirely," Beck said.

This should be a great reason to hear the  case, but you never know.  Just like how it went to the 11 judge panel in the 9th that is a rarity.

9th Circuit Rules U.S. Constitution
Does NOT Grant the Right to Carry!

Oh, wow, I didn't know Kennedy came out of retirement and is a sitting justice again. Did they kick Coney-Barrett out or is it 10 total justices now?

Let the courts explain to the family why she couldn't defend herself

https://www.foxnews.com/us/los-angeles-stabbed-knocked-out-rock

California dusting off their knife control bills for submission ....

Here's the opinion, I suggest everyone at least skim through the 215 page opnion.
https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2021/03/24/12-17808.pdf

SCOTUS postponed their decision on taking on the NY CCW case to Monday because of our 9th circuit ruling.  This decision will determine which way Young will go, but looks like they're interested.

I get the feeling the SCOTUS isn't going to take this one up. I don't think it is the best case for our side either. I hope some of the other cases in the works do make it up to the SCOTUS and cement our rights better.

I get the feeling the SCOTUS isn't going to take this one up. I don't think it is the best case for our side either. I hope some of the other cases in the works do make it up to the SCOTUS and cement our rights better.

I beg to differ because HI is the only state that issues zero OC/CCW permits annually.  At least NY or CA issues 1.  IIRC, LA county issued 4 last year.

SCOTUS is considering this case:

SCOTUS is considering this case:

He was mentioning today was the day they decide.  Hope it's favorable. 

SCOTUS is considering this case:

I'll just have to repeat again, I guess, in contradiction to the speaker above, that the Ninth Circuit Young v Hawaii decision did not assert there is no right to openly carry a firearm outside the home, it asserted there is no right to openly carry "small arms capable of being concealed..." outside the home.

I beg to differ because HI is the only state that issues zero OC/CCW permits annually.  At least NY or CA issues 1.  IIRC, LA county issued 4 last year.

I could be wrong, I just don't get the feeling they are going to want to put out some ruling that says everyone gets to open carry. I understand that a SCOTUS ruling isn't simply a yes or a no, that they can uphold part while striking another part but who knows. I think we would have a better chance with a concealed carry case. I think it would be bad if the SCOTUS gave us open carry but not concealed carry.

I could be wrong, I just don't get the feeling they are going to want to put out some ruling that says everyone gets to open carry. I understand that a SCOTUS ruling isn't simply a yes or a no, that they can uphold part while striking another part but who knows. I think we would have a better chance with a concealed carry case. I think it would be bad if the SCOTUS gave us open carry but not concealed carry.

It's not their place to say what's a better option, but to interpret what the Constitution says.

It's very possible they will say that the Constitution protects the right to bear arms, and that there is no reasonable assumption that the right only exists in your home.  Most threats would be encountered outside the home.  They may also say that the states may decide on open, concealed or both as a lawful method to carry, but they must allow at least one.

The question is not whether concealed carry is protected.  It's about whether bearing arms is protected outside the home.