If the Supreme Court rules we have the right to carry outside our home will that force states to accept reciprocity from other states or at least offer a path for non residents to obtain a shall issue permit as well?

 

My right to free speech and to be secure in my papers is intact when I travel to NY... So should me 2A right???

 

Do you think this will all be address in the hopefully pending SCOTUS ruling?

If reciprocity is not on the table right now it needs to be the next main fight to focus on....

 

As I keep reading "the right to self defense should not end at my front door"..... It also should not end at the state line....

 

 

 

i dont think they current cases will have any impact on this. I believe the ruling will be a narrow view regarding justifiable need. They dont seem to touch on topics not being fought directly.

While I completely agree that constitutional rights shouldn't end at state lines. You're talking football while everyone else is talking baseball. Both sports but different fields. Unfortunately they are different battles at this point.

While I completely agree that constitutional rights shouldn't end at state lines. You're talking football while everyone else is talking baseball. Both sports but different fields. Unfortunately they are different battles at this point.

great way to put it.....I tip my hat to you

It won't directly cause reciprocity to be the law of the land. There are a few ways this could go if we have a good outcome.

 

The most likely outcome would be that SCT would rule the way the 9th circuit did, in that the 2A applies outside the home and states have to allow a means of carrying handguns as a fundamental right. I believe that justifiable need in NJ will either be struck down, or the superior court and local PD will have to accept "self defense" as justifiable need. This only requires the AG and NJOAL (office of administrative law) to codify it in the administrative code (NJAC) which is how the current standard of justifiable need became law, after Siccardi. 

 

Another way this could go is that states could decide that they could just allow open carry, with or without a permit. In that case I hope everyone is ready for massive open carry marches and open carry in the wawa because you neeyed to carry in the wawa.

 

As far as reciprocity goes, that wouldn't happen with this lawsuit. However, jurisdictions like NYC would have to allow carry for residents at a bare minimum. There may be another lawsuit for non-resident permits. There was one in NY for part time residents and it was ruled favorably. Or Congress could pass a law if the Republicans regain control of the Senate (possible) and 2016 we get a Republican, Conservative President (probably not likely). 

I agree.... Having SCOTUS address the issue of reciprocity would be a long shot.... Perhaps once carry outside the home is addressed it would give enough momentum for congress to get a National Reciprocity Bill like The H.R. 822 pushed thru the following year.

 

 

 

While I completely agree that constitutional rights shouldn't end at state lines. You're talking football while everyone else is talking baseball. Both sports but different fields. Unfortunately they are different battles at this point.

 

 

Except one battle has already been decided. There is SCOTUS precedent for the question of restricting right to us citizens simply because they entered another state. Keep in mind the 2nd was affirmed as an individual right, and has now become an incorporated right. It applies to all states. They say the right to carry in some form outside the home exists, it exists in all 50 states. For California, with no reciprocity, and a law that forbids issuing to non-residents, they'll have to fix that. For NJ, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the permitting process is available to anyone from any state. They'll tell you no, but you can apply as far as I can tell.  In theory, if the states play stupid on the issue, it should not have to go back to SCOTUS and should be sorted at the circuit level at worst unless the circuit courts are going to ignore all sorts of precedent and put many other decisions in peril. 

Except one battle has already been decided. There is SCOTUS precedent for the question of restricting right to us citizens simply because they entered another state. Keep in mind the 2nd was affirmed as an individual right, and has now become an incorporated right. It applies to all states. They say the right to carry in some form outside the home exists, it exists in all 50 states. For California, with no reciprocity, and a law that forbids issuing to non-residents, they'll have to fix that. For NJ, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the permitting process is available to anyone from any state. They'll tell you no, but you can apply as far as I can tell.  In theory, if the states play stupid on the issue, it should not have to go back to SCOTUS and should be sorted at the circuit level at worst unless the circuit courts are going to ignore all sorts of precedent and put many other decisions in peril. 

 

 

I agree with this. For me, without reciprocity I will look to get a permit in NJ, NYC and PA at a minimum. Maybe Maryland and California too. My Utah, Florida and Connecticut will cover me for other places that I need to go. 

 

But at some point it will get silly so it would be better to get reciprocity.