Even though to me, "Shall Not Be Infringed" seems to be plain freakin' English that doesn't need interpretation, there are apparently a great number of people who can't seem to grasp the concept.
The Ninth Circuit just helped the illiterate bastards out.
By David Kopel
February 13 at 1:17 pm
The Ninth Circuit’s decision in Peruta v. San Diego, released minutes ago, affirms the right of law-abiding citizens to carry handguns for lawful protection in public.
California law has a process for applying for a permit to carry a handgun for protection in public, with requirements for safety training, a background check, and so on. These requirements were not challenged. The statute also requires that the applicant have “good cause,” which was interpreted by San Diego County to mean that the applicant is faced with current specific threats. (Not all California counties have this narrow interpretation.) The Ninth Circuit, in a 2-1 opinion written by Judge O’Scannlain, ruled that Peruta was entitled to Summary Judgement, because the “good cause” provision violates the Second Amendment.
The Court ruled that a government may specify what mode of carrying to allow (open or concealed), but a government may not make it impossible for the vast majority of Californians to exercise their Second Amendment right to bear arms.
There is more in Mr. Kopel's article at the link above.
My thanks to The Liberty Zone for being on top of this and posting about the decision just minutes after it's announcement.
Good job Nicki!