SCOPE NY

Briefings

<< First  < Prev   1   2   3   4   5   ...   Next >  Last >> 
  • 05/13/2021 9:00 AM | Anonymous

    Where Are All The Guns?  by Frank Melloni - Thursday, April 29, 2021

    Where Are All The Guns?

    Where are all the guns? If you walk into any gun store these days, you are likely to hear this question uttered across the counter. With more than five million law-abiding citizens making their first purchase, it is no wonder that we are seeing a shortage of just about every type of firearm on the market. The follow-up questions, of course, are “Why's it taking so long to recover?” and “What is being done to replenish the market?” Curious myself, I reached out to some of the biggest manufacturers to find out what their new production approach was and maybe even get a little peek behind the curtain.

    Savage Arms

    Of all the manufacturers that I spoke with, Savage was the most optimistic. The only roadblock that they claim to be hitting is the lead times on certain products, namely the Asian-made optics for some of its complete firearm packages. While the focus during late 2020 was on the Axis and Axis II families, today production is up across the board without major shutdowns of any one product type.

    By implementing a third shift and ramping production up to seven days a week, the lines are running nonstop. The only interruption to speak of occurred during the middle of 2020 to reorganize and reconfigure the factory to meet CDC guidelines and provide a safer workplace. Our source over there signed off by saying, “In our production facilities, we have generated well over 100-percent growth in the last eight months.

    Partners and suppliers are also working to keep up with demand. With our Stevens pump shotgun partner, [Savage] reconfigured and expanded their production capacity to produce even more of their security-style shotguns, a best seller for 2020. Last spring, we sold about four months of regular inventory of these in just three days.”

    Kimber America

    Defensive handguns have grabbed a major share of the market. With vacations on hold, many buyers used those extra funds to buy a high-end pistol. When we think of high-end pistols, Kimber America comes to mind and we got a few minutes of their time for an update. Like most other companies, Kimber is increasing production.

    However, instead of just adding shifts, the company is expanding its second location in Troy, Al. To get more products out, more than 200 new employees were hired to span not only the production lines, but the engineering side of the company as well. This will ensure that we continue to see new designs for 2021 and the years to come.

    While Kimber offers quite a larger variety of handguns, our contact has informed us that the high-performance models such as the Rapide and Super Jägare have garnered the most interest and they are doing all they can to get more of those out to dealers. The next highest demand goes to the concealed carry handguns from the Micro 9 category, these are getting a bump in production as well.

    Taurus USA

    The pandemic also reduced many folks' available funds, particularly for a first gun. Not having a ton of cash on hand doesn’t mean that you can’t get a quality firearm, and those looking to maximize their value often turn to Taurus USA. If you only have $300 and want to get every dollars’ worth, it’s hard to do better than one of its defensive pistols.

    Taurus exclaimed that models like the G3 and G3c have been highly sought after since early 2020 and continue to generate sharp demand at the time of this writing. Production has been ramped up to full capacity with zero downtime in both the company's US and Brazilian factories. Research and development for new products has not been affected, as the engineers are still hard at work creating designs like the new TX-22 Competition pistol, which is sure to be a hit as most folks are doing all they can to save their center-fire ammunition.

    Ruger

    I wrapped my investigation up by tapping one of the best-rounded companies in the industry, Ruger. From single-action revolvers to AR-15s, this company has arguably the most extensive lineup of any firearms manufacturer. I reached out to see if they planned on keeping all of these items available in the upcoming years and, to my surprise, our contact answered in the affirmative.

    Ruger’s policy is NOT to stop the production of any one product to help meet the demand of another. Instead, the company has hired extra personnel and paid overtime to ensure that each line produces as many guns as possible. At the time of our interview, they relayed that every single product is selling out, so it doesn’t make sense to change things up.

    The only factory changes were those done to increase social distancing and meet CDC guidelines. As for roadblocks, the only one they had to speak to was personnel. Ruger has hired and is continuing to hire workers for nearly every position, so if you are looking to break into the firearm industry, now just might be the time to touch-up your resume.

    Overall, none of the companies were willing to gamble on when things might “return to normal,” largely because demand is unprecedented and therefore unpredictable. Any estimate would be based on demand going back to a reasonable level, and unfortunately, the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic is keeping the pressure on.

    We all must remain patient and optimistic that our favorite firearms will be available soon enough at our local gun shops. In the meantime, with gun-control measures being discussed in Washington, we should remain as active as possible to ensure that we will still be able to own them when they return to the shelves.

  • 04/28/2021 11:05 PM | Anonymous

    Armed Shoplifter Stopped By Concealed Carrier and a Good Samaritan  by Luke McCoy

    A Beech Grove Walmart was the scene of a resisting shoplifter being fired at by a licensed gun owner and then stopped by a Good Samaritan while fleeing.

    Armed Shoplifter Stopped By Concealed Carrier and a Good Samaritan

    The shoplifter, who went on to draw and point a gun at the store’s security guard after escaping arrest. As the suspect was pointing a gun at the security guard, a licensed gun owner saw what was taking place and fired at him. None of the shots hit the suspect and as he fled through the parking lot, another Good Samaritan tackled him. The resisting shoplifter and the store’s loss prevention officer were treated for minor injuries. The security officer, who is also a park ranger, suffered no injuries.

    Walmart does not permit open carry, so it is safe to assume the licensed gun owner was carrying concealed. Samone Burris, an Indianapolis Metro Police officer, thanked the licensed gun owner as well as the parking lot civilian for helping stop the suspect.

    “IT IS PHENOMENAL THAT WHEN WE NEEDED THE COMMUNITY THEY WERE RIGHT THERE WITH US,” BURRIS SAID.

    The bravery of all things should of course be honored to both heroes at the scene.

    In regards to self-defense, one should always be wary of basic firearm safety: know your target and who/what is beyond the said target. It is not exactly known the measure of how much the licensed gun holder missed his mark(s) on the suspect. Although the gun-wielding suspect posed a potential risk to others after not being immediately disarmed, thankfully the shots were enough to deter the suspect, along with the Good Samaritan.

    All things considered, the public presence of a licensed CCW holder should not be overlooked. One can only imagine what could’ve happened had the suspect not been deterred by an armed citizen.

  • 04/26/2021 7:57 PM | Anonymous

    Supreme Court to take up right to carry gun for self-defense

    WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court agreed on Monday to hear an appeal to expand gun rights in the United States in a New York case over the right to carry a firearm in public for self-defense.

    The case marks the court’s first foray into gun rights since Justice Amy Coney Barrett came on board in October, making a 6-3 conservative majority.

    The justices said Monday they will review a lower-court ruling that upheld New York’s restrictive gun permit law. The court’s decision to take on the case follows mass shootings in recent weeks in Indiana, Georgia, Colorado and California and comes amid congressional efforts to tighten gun laws. President Joe Biden also has announced several executive actions to combat what he called an “epidemic and an international embarrassment” of gun violence in America.

    The case is especially significant during the coronavirus pandemic, said Eric Tirschwell, the legal director of Everytown for Gun Safety, a gun control group backed by former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg. “Gun violence has only worsened during the pandemic, and a ruling that opened the door to weakening our gun laws could make it even harder for cities and states to grapple with this public health crisis,” Tirschwell said.

    The court had turned down review of the issue in June, before Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death.

    New York is among eight states that limit who has the right to carry a weapon in public. The others are: California, Delaware, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey and Rhode Island.

    In the rest of the country, gun owners have little trouble legally carrying their weapons when they go out.

    Paul Clement, representing challengers to New York’s permit law, said the court should use the case to settle the issue once and for all. “Thus, the nation is split, with the Second Amendment alive and well in the vast middle of the nation, and those same rights disregarded near the coasts,” Clement wrote on behalf of the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association and two New York residents.

    Calling on the court to reject the appeal, the state said its law promotes public safety and crime reduction and neither bans people from carrying guns nor allows everyone to do so.

    Federal courts have largely upheld the permit limits. Last month an 11-judge panel of the federal appeals court in San Francisco rejected a challenge to Hawaii’s permit regulations in an opinion written by a conservative judge, Jay Bybee.

    “Our review of more than 700 years of English and American legal history reveals a strong theme: government has the power to regulate arms in the public square,” Bybee wrote in a 7-4 decision for the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

    The issue of carrying a gun for self-defense has been seen for several years as the next major step for gun rights at the Supreme Court, following decisions in 2008 and 2010 that established a nationwide right to keep a gun at home for self-defense.

    In June, Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, complained that rather than take on the constitutional issue, “the Court simply looks the other way.”

    But Barrett has a more expansive view of gun rights than Ginsburg. She wrote a dissent in 2019, when she was a judge on the federal appeals court in Chicago, that argued that a conviction for a nonviolent felony — in this case, mail fraud — shouldn’t automatically disqualify someone from owning a gun.

    She said that her colleagues in the majority were treating the Second Amendment as a “second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees.”

    North country Congresswoman Elise Stefanik (R. - 21st District) issued the following statement:

    “My strong and consistent record of standing up for the Second Amendment Rights of my constituents in the North Country has proudly earned me an A+ rating from the NRA, the highest of any member of the New York Delegation. I cannot overstate the importance of the Supreme Court’s consideration of this case for law-abiding gun owners in New York State, especially as Governor Cuomo, President Biden, and Democrats across the country continue to impose strict, unconstitutional gun control measures. The Constitution is clear – the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. I am hopeful the Supreme Court will rule in favor of that constitutional truth and protect the right of law-abiding New Yorkers and Americans to defend themselves, regardless of where they are.”

    Governor Andrew Cuomo released this statement:

    “In light of the Supreme Court’s announcement this morning that they will take up New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Corlett in the next term, it’s worth remembering that New York’s nation-leading gun violence prevention laws, including the SAFE Act we passed after the tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary, haven’t stopped anyone with a legal right to buy, possess, or use a gun from doing so - but they have made us the safest big state in the country.

    “This NRA-backed case is a massive threat to that security. Imagine someone carrying a gun through Times Square, onto the subway, or to a tailgate outside of a Bills game - the NRA’s goal here is to shift the onus onto regular New Yorkers, police officers, security guards, and first responders to determine whether an armed individual poses a threat or is simply carrying for self-defense. The streets of New York are not the O.K. Corral, and the NRA’s dream of a society where everyone is terrified of each other and armed to the teeth is abhorrent to our values.

    “While we have to respect the role of the courts, we don’t have to play along with the NRA’s strategy of using them to roll back strong gun safety laws passed by individual states, turning the lowest common denominator into the law of the land. We can keep all Americans safe through federal action. Changing the law to require a background check on all gun sales, ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, implement Red Flag orders, and close the Charleston loophole is overwhelmingly popular, constitutional, and effective. We’ve proven as much in New York State, and with President Biden in the White House, Congress now has an opportunity to do the same. I urge them to take it.”

  • 04/26/2021 11:39 AM | Anonymous

    Court to take up major gun-rights case  by Amy Howeon Apr 26, 2021 at 10:50 am

    Over a decade after it ruled that the Second Amendment protects the right to have a handgun in the home for self-defense, the Supreme Court agreed on Monday to decide whether the Constitution also protects the right to carry a gun outside the home. The justices’ announcement that they will take up a challenge to a New York law that requires anyone who wants to carry a gun in the state to show a good reason for doing so sets the stage for a major ruling on gun rights in the court’s 2021-22 term.

    The law at issue in the case, New York Rifle & Pistol Association v. Corlett, is similar to gun-control measures in other states. To receive an unrestricted license to carry a concealed firearm outside the home, a person must show “proper cause” – meaning a special need for self-protection. Two men challenged the law after New York rejected their concealed-carry applications, and they are backed by a gun-rights advocacy group. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit upheld the law, prompting the challengers to appeal to the Supreme Court.

    After considering the case at three conferences, the justices agreed to weigh in. They instructed the parties to brief a slightly narrower question than the challengers had asked them to decide, limiting the issue to whether the state’s denial of the individuals’ applications to carry a gun outside the home for self-defense violated the Second Amendment. But the case nonetheless has the potential to be a landmark ruling. It will be argued in the fall, with a decision expected sometime next year.

    The announcement came just one day short of one year after the court’s ruling in a different challenge brought by the same gun-rights group. That case involved New York City’s ban on the transport of licensed handguns outside the city. Because the city had repealed the ban before the case reached the Supreme Court, a majority of the court agreed with the city that the challengers’ original claims were moot – that is, no longer a live controversy. In a concurring opinion, Justice Brett Kavanaugh agreed that the case should return to the lower court, but he also indicated that he shared the concern – expressed by Justice Samuel Alito in his dissenting opinion – that the lower courts “may not be properly applying” the Supreme Court’s most recent gun-rights rulings, District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. City of Chicago. Therefore, Kavanaugh urged the court to “address that issue soon, perhaps in one of the several Second Amendment cases with petitions for certiorari” then pending before the justices, several of which involved the right to carry a handgun outside the home for self-defense.

    Shortly after issuing that decision, the court distributed for consideration at its May 1, 2020, conference 10 gun rights cases that they had put on hold while the New York City case was pending. The justices considered those cases at six consecutive conferences before finally denying review in all 10 of them in June.

    Justice Clarence Thomas dissented from the court’s decision not to take up at least one of the 10 cases. In an opinion that was joined in part by Kavanaugh, Thomas argued that the Supreme Court would likely grant review if a law required someone to show a good reason before exercising her right to free speech or to seek an abortion. However, Thomas continued, the Supreme Court had opted to “simply look[] the other way” when “faced with a petition challenging just such a restriction on citizens’ Second Amendment rights.”

    There is no way to know why the justices turned down the petitions for review last year. Commentators speculated that some conservative justices may not have been confident that Chief Justice John Roberts would provide a fifth vote to expand gun rights. However, since then Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was replaced by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, whose vote as a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit suggests that she might take a broader approach to the Second Amendment.

  • 04/21/2021 6:55 PM | Anonymous

    2021 SCOPE Member Meeting

    At SCOPE’s Members’ Meeting on May 8th, State Senator Tom O'Mara will be speaking.  Mr. O'Mara represents New York’s 58th Senate District which encompasses all of Chemung, Schuyler, Yates and Steuben Counties and part of Tompkins County.

    As previously announced, Congressman and Governor candidate Lee Zeldin will also be speaking. 

    Other potential speakers will be announced when confirmed.

    Our 2021 Annual SCOPE Member Meeting will be held on
    Saturday, May 8th @ 10:00 AM

    Montour Falls Moose Lodge
    2096 State Route 14  Montour Falls, NY 14865
      

    The meeting is open to all SCOPE members in good standing.
    You must RSVP

    Lunch will be provided
    *COVID Restrictions require masks inside the Lodge*

    CLICK HERE FOR RSVP FORM

    Please mail your RSVP: Postmarked NO later than April 24th: TO
    S.C.O.P.E. Member Meeting
    P.O. Box 165
    East Aurora, NY 14052


  • 04/20/2021 8:32 PM | Anonymous

    2021 SCOPE Member Meeting

        Members Meeting Special Announcement

    At SCOPE’s Members’ Meeting, Congressman Lee Zeldin will be speaking.  Mr. Zeldin represents
    New York’s 1st Congressional District on Long Island and is a potential Republican candidate for Governor in 2022. 

    Other potential speakers will be announced when confirmed

    Saturday, May 8th @ 10:00 AM

    at the

    Montour Falls Moose Lodge    2096 State Route 14  Montour Falls, NY 1

    The meeting is open to all SCOPE members in good standing.
    You must RSVP

    Lunch will be provided

    *COVID Restrictions require masks inside the Lodge*

    CLICK HERE FOR RSVP FORM

    Please mail your RSVP: 

  • 04/19/2021 9:54 AM | Anonymous

    " The Shot Heard Around the World"   On April 19, 1775, the American Revolution began in the villages of Lexington and Concord near Boston, Massachusetts.

    The previous night saw 700 British troops march out of Boston with orders to seize any colonial weapons they might find. By dawn the next morning they had reached Lexington, where they found about 75 American minutemen waiting for them on the village green. “Don’t fire unless fired upon,” Captain Jonas Parker ordered the Patriots, “but if they mean to have a war, let it begin here!”

    The British commander ordered the Americans to lay down their arms. “You damned rebels, disperse!” he cried, and the outnumbered colonists grudgingly began to drift away. Suddenly someone  fired a shot – no one knows who – and the surprised British ranks let loose a volley. A few seconds later, eight dead and ten wounded minutemen lay on Lexington Green.

    The redcoats continued up the road to Concord, where hundreds of Americans had gathered. Another small battle ensued before the British decided that it was time to return to Boston.

    Then the real fighting began. The road back to Lexington became a nightmarish gauntlet of deadly fire for the redcoats as the Americans lay in ambush behind trees, rocks, and woodpiles. The  helpless British columns endured the sniping nearly all the way back to Boston.

    When the day was over, about 250 of the king’s men had been killed or wounded. The colonists lost about 90. News of the conflict caused militiamen all over New England to shoulder their muskets and tramp toward Boston. The struggle for independence had begun. As Ralph Waldo Emerson wrote in his famous poem “Concord Hymn,” the Americans had “fired the shot heard ’round the world.”

    The American Patriot's Almanac

  • 04/15/2021 6:57 PM | Anonymous

    New poll demonstrates that Americans are not divided on “party lines” on gun issues.

    POLL REAFFIRMS THAT OVER 70% OF AMERICANS SUPPORT GUN RIGHTS, APRIL 15, 2021 ROB PINCUS | 2AO EVP

    Second Amendment Foundation commissioned this research and, not surprisingly, it confirms that most Americans respect and want to protect individual gun rights.

    “Based on these survey results, anti-gunners, including Joe Biden, should cool their zeal for passing new legislation,” Alan M Gottlieb observed. “Over 72 percent of Americans support the right to keep and bear arms. Over 73 percent agree the Second Amendment is one of our most important and cherished rights protected by the U.S. Constitution. And more than 58 percent say they are likely to support a candidate for Congress who supports the right to keep and bear arms.”

    You can learn more about the Poll and what it tells us here in this article at the Outdoor Wire.
    Abolishing the Second Amendment isn’t a viable option.

    There is a false narrative being spread by fear mongerers on both sides of the “gun debate” in this country. The truth is that most people want our communities to be safer AND respect individual liberties. Most gun owners have firearms expressly to be safer and most of us exercise our rights responsibly.  There is no “culture war” over protecting our neighborhoods and loved ones. 

    There is a reason that the gun grabbers don’t go after the Second Amendment directly: they know they could never abolish it. The majority of Americans, including people from every political party, race, creed, lifestyle and economic bracket, support the individual right to keep and bear arms for protection… as they should. The diversity amongst gun owners can be seen in every facet of firearms related activities, from competition shooting to training for armed defense and from hunting to gun rights advocacy.

    This poll, which you can see in its entirety HERE,  reaffirms a position that 2AO has always held:  Americans generally cherish individual freedoms and are not anti-gun. There isn’t a significant portion of our population that wants to take away guns or abolish the Second Amendment. We believe that gun control should be removed from the agenda of any major American Political Party. Surely, there are many who “support gun rights” who are not absolutists. These fellow citizens who in the middle ground on guns are our allies in the fight to protect our right to keep and bear arms. This is why we believe that grassroots advocacy is incredibly important. With continued demonstration that the gun community has a sincere dedication to reducing negative outcomes involving firearms, reasoned dialogue, outreach and educational advocacy, we will continue to regain lost rights and bring more people into the community.

    -Rob Pincus, -Executive Vice President, 2AO

  • 04/14/2021 9:21 AM | Anonymous

    One day, as Marine Corporal Jason Dunham and his buddies swapped talk in their barracks in Iraq, the conversation turned to the best way to survive a hand grenade attack. The corporal suggested covering a grenade with a Kevlar helmet. “I’ll bet a Kevlar would stop it,” he said.

    Dunham, raised in the small town of Scio, New York, was a 22-year-old with a natural gift for leadership. He’d been a star athlete, setting a Scio Central School baseball record for highest batting average. Now a rifle squad leader, he’d extended his enlistment to stay with his comrades in Iraq.

    On April 14, 2004, Dunham was on his way to help a Marine convoy that had been ambushed in western Iraq when an insurgent leaped from a car and attacked him. As two Marines rushed to help wrestle the man to the ground, they heard Dunham yell, “No, no, no – watch his hand!” Before they realized what was happening, Dunham threw his helmet and his own body over a live enemy grenade.

    The sacrifice helped contain the blast but left Dunham mortally wounded. He died eight days later at the National Naval Medical Center in Bethesda, Maryland.

    In January 2007 President George W. Bush awarded the Medal of Honor posthumously to Jason Dunham. “Corporal Dunham saved the lives of two of his men, and showed the world what it means to be a Marine,” the president said. He was the first Marine to earn the Medal of Honor for service in Iraq.

    Journalist Michael Phillips, author of The Gift of Valor, wrote that shortly before leaving for the Persian Gulf, Dunham told friends of his plans to extend his enlistment. “You’re crazy for extending,” a fellow Marine had said. “Why?”

    “I want to make sure everyone makes it home alive,” Jason Dunham answered.

    Copied from Bill Bennett's "The American Patriot Daily Almanac"
    Click here for the original web version

  • 04/10/2021 5:37 PM | Anonymous

    Carrying Guns in Public Is Not a  Constitutional Right, Ninth Circuit Rules

    And so now it becomes "ripe for Supreme Court review."

    The majority of an 11-judge en banc Ninth Circuit panel concluded that the Second Amendment does not guarantee the right to carry firearms outside the home.

    SAN FRANCISCO (CN) — Americans have no right to carry guns in public, a divided en banc Ninth Circuit panel ruled Wednesday, reversing a prior Ninth Circuit decision that struck down a Hawaii firearm restriction as unconstitutional.

    “There is no right to carry arms openly in public; nor is any such right within the scope of the Second Amendment,” U.S. Circuit Judge Jay Bybee, a George W. Bush appointee, wrote for the majority of an 11-judge panel in a 127-page opinion.

    Looking back on 700 years of legal history dating back to 14th century England, seven judges in the majority found “overwhelming evidence” that the law has never given people “an unfettered right to carry weapons in public spaces.”

    The seven-judge majority traced legal texts and laws back to 1348 when the English parliament enacted the statute of Northampton, which banned carrying weapons in fairs or markets or before the King’s justices. It also cited multiple laws from colonial and pre-Civil War America in which states and colonies restricted the possession of weapons in public places.

    “The Second Amendment did not contradict the fundamental principle that the government assumes primary responsibility for defending persons who enter our public spaces,” Bybee wrote. “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.’”

    Writing for the dissent, Senior U.S. Circuit Judge Diarmuid O’Scannlain, a Ronald Reagan appointee, said the majority failed to properly interpret the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2008 decision in District of Columba v. Heller, which overturned Washington D.C.’s total ban on handguns and a requirement that rifles and shotguns be kept unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger-lock device.

    “The Second Amendment’s text, history, and structure, and the Supreme Court’s reasoning in Heller, all point squarely to the same conclusion: Armed self-defense in public is at the very core of the Second Amendment right,” O’Scannlain wrote.

    Plaintiff George Young sued Hawaii in 2012 for denying his applications for permits to carry a concealed or openly visible handgun. A Hawaii state law requires a license to carry a gun in public.

    Under a Hawaii County regulation, the police chief may only grant such licenses to those who need a gun for their job or who show “reason to fear injury” to their “person or property.” No one other than a security guard has ever obtained an open-carry license in Hawaii, lawyers for the county acknowledged during a Ninth Circuit hearing in 2018.

    In July 2018, a divided three-judge Ninth Circuit panel ruled that carrying a gun in public is a constitutional right and that Hawaii cannot deny permits to all non-security guard civilians who wish to exercise that right.

    On Wednesday, the en banc panel majority reversed that decision, finding the Supreme Court’s 2008 Heller decision is not inconsistent with state laws that restrict the right to carry arms in public.

    Heller found that the pre-existing right to keep and bear arms is not a right to ‘carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose,’” Bybee wrote for the majority.

    Young had argued that Hawaii’s 169-year-old law impermissibly limited open-carry permits to security guards, as applied in regulations adopted by the County of Hawaii in 1997.

    During oral arguments last September, a lawyer representing the Aloha State said the law does not limit open-carry licenses to security guards. He cited the Hawaii Attorney General’s 2018 guidance stating that an applicant can obtain an open-carry permit by demonstrating “a need to carry a firearm for protection that substantially exceeds the need possessed by ordinary law-abiding citizens.”

    The state says the attorney general’s 2018 guidance overrides the county’s 1997 regulation that ostensibly limits open-carry licenses to security guards.

    Despite that argument, O’Scannlain found the fact that the 1997 regulation remains “on the books” and that Hawaii has never granted permits to a non-security guard civilian shows the state has been unconstitutionally restricting Second Amendment rights.

    “In the County of Hawaii, the historical dearth of open-carry permits for private citizens is no mere ‘pattern or practice,’” O’Scannlain wrote. “It is a matter of official policy.”

    In a concurring dissent, U.S. Circuit Judge Ryan Nelson, a Donald Trump appointee, argued the panel should have remanded the case back to district court to determine if Young could plausibly allege Hawaii’s law has been applied in an unconstitutional manner.

    The failure to do so could have widespread consequences for people suing to protect their constitutional rights, he said, especially for litigants representing themselves without an attorney. Young originally filed his lawsuit pro se but was represented by lawyers in his appeal.

    “It will preclude a host of future as-applied constitutional challenges under the First, Fourth, Fifth, and Eighth Amendments previously recognized by this court — especially for pro se civil rights plaintiffs,” Nelson wrote.

    By upholding state laws that restrict carrying guns in public, the Ninth Circuit joined three other circuit courts that have issued similar rulings: the Second, Third and Fourth Circuits. Meanwhile, the D.C. Circuit and Seventh Circuit have struck down state laws that ban carrying guns in public. That makes the dispute ripe for Supreme Court review.

    Although some circuit courts have upheld restrictions on carrying guns in public, Young’s attorney Alan Beck, of San Diego, argued that no court has gone as far as the Ninth Circuit did in its en banc opinion Wednesday.

    “The Ninth Circuit’s opinion, which finds the Second Amendment right does not apply outside the home at all, contradicts the decisions of every federal circuit court in the country that has ruled on this issue,” Beck said in an email. “We will be seeking Supreme Court review in order to overturn the Ninth Circuit’s erroneous decision.”

    Bill Clinton appointees William Fletcher, M. Margaret McKeown, Kim McLane Wardlaw, and Chief Ninth Circuit Judge Sidney Thomas joined Bybee in the majority. Circuit Judges Richard Clifton, a George W. Bush appointee, and Michelle T. Friedland, a Barack Obama appointee, also sided with the majority.

    Circuit Judges Sandra Ikuta and Consuelo Callahan, both George W. Bush appointees, joined O’Scannlain and Nelson in the dissent.

<< First  < Prev   1   2   3   4   5   ...   Next >  Last >> 

A 2nd Amendment Defense Organization, defending the rights of New York State gun owners to keep and bear arms!

PO Box 165
East Aurora, NY 14052

SCOPE is a 501(c)4 non-profit organization.

[ Site Developed By A2Z Enhanced Digital Solutions ]

Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software