7th Circuit Court Lets Posner Ruling Stand; Huge Win For Concealed Carry

Right to Carry
7th Circuit Court Lets Posner Ruling Stand; Huge Win For Concealed Carry
Second Amendment Foundation
Second Amendment Foundation

BELLEVUE, WA –-(Ammoland.com)- The Second Amendment Foundation today won a significant victory for concealed carry when the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals let stand a December ruling by a three-judge panel of the court that forces Illinois to adopt a concealed carry law, thus affirming that the right to bear arms exists outside the home.

The ruling came in Moore v. Madigan, a case filed by SAF. The December opinion that now stands was written by Judge Richard Posner, who gave the Illinois legislature 180 days to “craft a new gun law that will impose reasonable limitations, consistent with the public safety and the Second Amendment…on the carrying of guns in public.”

That clock is ticking, noted SAF Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb.

“Illinois lawmakers need to create some kind of licensing system or face the prospect of not having any regulations at all when Judge Posner’s deadline arrives,” Gottlieb said. “They need to act. They can no longer run and hide from this mandate.”

“We were delighted with Judge Posner’s ruling in December,” he continued, “and today’s decision by the entire circuit to allow his ruling to stand is a major victory, and not just for gun owners in Illinois. Judge Posner’s ruling affirmed that the right to keep and bear arms, itself, extends beyond the boundary of one’s front door.”

In December, Judge Posner wrote, “The right to ‘bear’ as distinct from the right to ‘keep’ arms is unlikely to refer to the home. To speak of ‘bearing’ arms within one’s home would at all times have been an awkward usage. A right to bear arms thus implies a right to carry a loaded gun outside the home.”

Judge Posner subsequently added, “To confine the right to be armed to the home is to divorce the Second Amendment from the right of self-defense described in Heller and McDonald.”

“It is now up to the legislature,” Gottlieb said, “to craft a statute that recognizes the right of ordinary citizens to carry outside the home, without a sea of red tape or a requirement to prove any kind of need beyond the cause of personal protection.”

The ruling also affects a similar case filed by the National Rifle Association known as Shepard v. Madigan.

9
Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
8 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
7 Comment authors
DefendMyRightsmiguel a alvaradoEdfreewillBecker Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
Notify of
DefendMyRights
Guest
DefendMyRights

Readers Digest used to have a section labeled “There ought to be a law”. While witty, entertaining, and somewhat useful, it laid the groundwork for liberals, well meaning or not, to change the focus of Constitutional Guarantees to miniscule alterations, locally, statewide, and ultimately federally, to the point where we are today. The Ten Commandments pretty much spelled out in rather clear language how society is supposed to behave. Banning that, say hello to Pandora’s friggin box. Nothing and no one is safe from rights grabbing liberals with legislative powers intent on making us all slaves to their dominatrix ideaology.… Read more »

miguel a alvarado
Guest
miguel a alvarado

we need more people who will stand-up and voice their rights, do call your representatives, and they eill return their thoughts, i did and most of them were in favor of the 2nd amendment, 1 danced around the topic of gun banning with no clear answer, the prez just did’nt respond???We need folks with guts on our side, like the NRA, and others, please don’t split hairs about who gets credit or not, we’re on the same side, correct???

Ed
Guest
Ed

Oops! Replace “abridged” in prior post with “infringed”. I get so worked up sometimes that my brain skips a beat or two… sorry ’bout that…

Ed
Guest
Ed

This ruling is a cheesy charade at best. “Shall not be abridged” is perfectly clear English. Any and all “laws” are precisely about “abridging” our free choices. No law allows anyone to choose or to do anything more than they could if there were no such “law”. To me, and under the real law, our Constitution, that exactly constitutes “abridgment”. Also, licenses and permits create “privileged classes”, also specifically prohibited, again, by our Constitution. Geez, people, THIS IS FOR KEEPS! If we don’t even know what our Rights are *supposed* to be, we will never be able to defend and… Read more »

freewill
Guest

In Chicago there is definately a need for protection against criminals! FBI stats. JAN-June 2012. 6,072 Robbery’s 5,942 Aggravated assaults 53,807 Property crimes 10,378 Burglary’s 34,794 Larceny thefts 8,635 Motor vehicle thefts Figures for rape not given. So who did the gun ban protect?

Becker
Guest
Becker

A victory is a victory, no matter who takes credit for it. We don’t need fighting between groups who are all for the same cause. That is what the gun grabbers want. Divide and conquer.We all believe in the same thing and I don’t care who gets or takes the credit. This is no time for in fighting and no time ever is.

Dale McMahan
Guest
Dale McMahan

As a citizen in the state on the west side of the Mississippi from Ill. Iowa is a open carry state,this difinitely a victory for people to now protect themselves and family from the evils that lerk out their. Congradulation to all the people who stood up to the lawmaker’s that are anti-gun. The saying: all men are created equal will now become more so then before.

The Old Coach
Guest
The Old Coach

The SAF does the heavy lifting,and the NRA demands the credit. While I won’t go to the trouble to drop my NRA membership, ALL of my financial support goes to SAF!!!