Okay, I agree. But how does this court, esteemed as it may be, come up with there being no right to a concealed weapon but yeah there’s probably a right to an open weapon?
The case was brought by gun owners in California who had sought concealed carry licenses. The gun owners were allegedly denied licenses because they did not meet the state’s requirements, namely that they had “good cause” to carry a concealed firearm, under policies written by county sheriffs.
We are never going to be able to settle any of this without an an actual honest to God update to the 2nd Amendment. The real problem with the damn thing is it was written in 1789 and whatever goddamn thing the authors meant just doesn’t exist 230 years later. Come up with a rewrite that can work going forward, until they come out with those phasers or light swords or some such 22nd century shit that will start the debate anew.