Queue the hoards of 2nd Amendment absolutists…
well, this is an unexpected bright spot in my day. sh*t, meet fan.
This makes me so happy to see. If people feel they need guns to protect themselves, great, but as someone who owns guns I find it a little unnerving that random Jane and Joe can be walking around with a gun. For me, eliminating concealed carry makes me feel more safe; less guns walking around (pun intended).
Doesn’t this mean open carry is ok?
I don’t live in the US nor am I a US citizen, so I’m very fuzzy about those issues, but what stops people from openly having a gun?
That’s fine. For me it’s always open carry, on account of my nudism.
Skin color, generally.
If people going about their daily business feel the need to carry guns to protect themselves, there is something very badly wrong.
It seems to me that there are several groups of people who many feel the need to carry firearms to protect themselves, specifically:
*Women,
*LGBT+ people, and specifically transgender people
*Muslims,
*People of Color
All of whom face the constant threat of targeted crimes of grave bodily harm and hate crimes.
Admittedly, not generally the people you think of when you think of concealed carry. If you can find a way to ensure these people can protect themselves while preventing the sterotypical white male bigot from being armed, have at it. But there are people who have a legitimate need for effective self defense tools, and until the world learns not to hate, that need isn’t going away.
100% agreed. I guess I was referring more to people’s apparent “need” to protect their home with firearms. Wasn’t terribly clear there; sorry.
Bear mace works pretty well.
As does the much more legal and easier to get wasp spray.
A quick internet check would suggest that it’s legal, though wasp spray in the eyes is certainly deserved by the chosen target.
Hopefully, privately owned businesses that insist that they don’t want guns brought into their establishments.
and the abolitionists 
In the State of California (which is under the jurisdiction of the 9th Circuit Court who decided this case). Open carry was recently banned by state law. So in for county governments which choose to severely limit concealed carry permit issuance (like the counties of Los Angeles, Alameda, San Francisco) this means that there is a de facto ban on any type of carry unless you have a permit from another county of some sort of exception (like being a police officer).
The major recent US Supreme Court (SCOTUS) cases address the right to arms and Heller and McDonald and they address self defense but only in the context of inside the home. So there is currently no federal court case enumerating a “right to carry” outside the home.
There is no definitive right regarding open carry either. It is currently governed by each local state’s laws (and maybe also by city or county law if the state laws or state constitution is silent.
The right to bear mace. I like it.
Admittedly, not generally the people you think of when you think of concealed carry. If you can find a way to ensure these people can protect themselves while preventing the sterotypical white male bigot from being armed, have at it.
Oh, they’re often the people I think of when I think of concealed carry–its hard not to these days, namely because of all the “concern” for them that has been the nauseating tactic of the NRA et al. in their open carry talking points . Yeah, the NRA is all about protecting Muslims and LGBTs.
Too bad they couldn’t show similar concern when they made some of those same groups among the biggest victims of the guns they so worship, and too bad there’s no evidence that concealed weapons actually “ensure” the protection they claim it does–other than in their gun-stroking wet dreams of course.
Not sure how well bearing Mace works outside the movies
This is my favorite kind of mace.
Cool, this is mine:
