A new California law that bans people from carrying firearms in most public places has once again been blocked from taking effect as a court challenge continues.

LOS ANGELES (AP) — A new California law that bans people from carrying firearms in most public places was once again blocked from taking effect Saturday as a court case challenging it continues.

A 9th Circuit Court of Appeals panel dissolved a temporary hold on a lower court injunction blocking the law. The hold was issued by a different 9th Circuit panel and had allowed the law to go into effect Jan. 1.

Saturday’s decision keeps in place a Dec. 20 ruling by U.S. District Judge Cormac Carney blocking the law. Carney said that it violates the Second Amendment and that gun rights groups would likely prevail in proving it unconstitutional.

The law, signed by Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, prohibits people from carrying concealed guns in 26 types of places including public parks and playgrounds, churches, banks and zoos. The ban applies regardless of whether a person has a concealed carry permit.

  • @Malfeasant@lemmy.world
    1•11 months ago

    Because at the time, there was no concept of “inside” or “outside” the militia, other than women and children, who unfortunately didn’t warrant much consideration.

    In any case, it’s quite clear - the 2a doesn’t say “the militia shall be allowed to have guns” it says “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”. The militia is brought up more to underline the importance of this right - if we want to be able to defend ourselves (be it individually or collectively) we must have access to weapons.

    • @Eldritch@lemmy.worldEnglish
      2•11 months ago

      Because at the time, there was no concept of “inside” or “outside” the militia

      Then how can you in honesty or good faith hand wave away the talk of militia. You can’t.

      In any case, it’s quite clear - the 2a doesn’t say “the militia shall be allowed to have guns” it says “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”

      False. This is the literal text of the 2nd amendment.

      A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

      “A well regulated Militia”, primary subject. “being necessary to the security of a free State”, core thought. “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms”, connected secondary subject. The militia being the people. “shall not be infringed.”, conclusion.

      • @Malfeasant@lemmy.world
        1•11 months ago

        Yes, the militia was not a separate concept from the people, they were used interchangeably, there was no inside vs outside the militia. I’m glad we agree

        • @Eldritch@lemmy.worldEnglish
          2•11 months ago

          So you’re saying the 2nd amendment concerns the militia? It’s funny then that you all constantly insist that 2/3 of the text of the second amendment doesn’t exist.