All of America is now constitutional carry

God bless Justice Thomas for saving the 2A

68 Likes

It will take awhile for this to fully take effect and you know some states are going to drag their feet through it. It is however a very real major victory for pro 2a advocates

20 Likes

Nope it takes effect immediately. They can drag their feet if they want to be sued into Bolivia

29 Likes

Dave Chappelle Gotcha GIF

17 Likes

How’s that work? Or how’s it supposed to work?

3 Likes

This is interesting, obviously, but particularly so for people like myself that live in states with very restrictive gun laws. I’m in Maryland. I have an 8-shot heavy framed S&W revolver for home defense. Am I going to be able to carry it outside the house now? For sure, I couldn’t up until this Supreme Court decision.

I would like to carry it. There are some real savages out there.

4 Likes

@gtownhoya halp!

2 Likes

Lol. Silly Americans.

Pew pew pew

Muh home defense!

Fuck off LAHEY!

7 Likes

Whoever assigns CCW in your state/county must accept self defense as justifiable cause to issue one to you. As long as you are not prohibited then they must issue it

11 Likes

“May issue” states have to become, “Shall issue”, states?

12 Likes

Correct

3 Likes

It is not constitutional carry. What changed is they cannot deny you if you are a legal person. It is now shall issue instead of may issue.

11 Likes

someone have a good link to this info? yes Im lazy…

1 Like

In for more info.

Wow. That’s a huge change for Maryland. Maybe I’ll start carrying my handcannon.

3 Likes

This.

Gonna submit my conceal carry application to NY ASAP.

6 Likes

31 Likes

Wow. Never thought I’d see this big of a win on 2A.

10 Likes

You already have a normal license?
I’ve heard this won’t have much effect in NY since its so tough to get a normal license anyway…?

1 Like

Its even better than you think. RIP Ca gun control

(1) Since Heller and McDonald, the Courts of Appeals have devel-
oped a “two-step” framework for analyzing Second Amendment chal-
lenges that combines history with means-end scrutiny. The Court re-
jects that two-part approach as having one step too many. Step one is
broadly consistent with Heller, which demands a test rooted in the Sec-
ond Amendment’s text, as informed by history. But Heller and McDon-
ald do not support a second step that applies means-end scrutiny in
the Second Amendment context. Heller’s methodology centered on
constitutional text and history. It did not invoke any means-end test
such as strict or intermediate scrutiny, and it expressly rejected any
interest-balancing inquiry akin to intermediate scrutiny. Pp. 9–15.

2 Likes