virtually all of the court's six Republican appointees seemed to agree with the challengers that the law, which requires the gun owners to obtain express permission from the property owner, violates the Second Amendment's right to bear arms.
#3 | Posted by truthhurts

Hawaii's position is supported by the MAGA created new (ridiculous) requirements under Bruen.
Under Bruen, for a gun law to be legal, it must align with our "historical tradition of firearm regulation."
And there is ample historical precedent of guns being banned from establishments.
There's a write-up about it in Reason or some other left-center source.

Trump Says Americans 'Can't Have Guns' At Protests.

Funny.
There were guns at the Cliven Bundy protests.
There were guns at the Michigan State House protests.
There were guns at the Unite The Right March in Charlottesville.
Kyle Rittenhouse brought a gun to a protest and became a Hero Of The Crybaby Right.

Now our Republican President says We The People can't have guns at protests.

Hey Republicans.
Is it fascism yet?

What would Charlie Kirk do?

Charlie was raising a fuss about IDF doing exactly this kind of thing to Palestinians, in the weeks and months before his death.

That's why Nick Fuentes ordered Charlie Kirk's assassination.

(this kind of thing = ICE terrorizing and executing civilians)

"When you research the history of it the enforcement was highly selective and political."

That's the whole point.
That's what Republicans want.
You're good at some things, but playing dumb isn't one of them.

"Wild times when people start referencing comically corrupt implementations of gun control"

Yeah. You can thank Republicans and Bruen for that.

But you won't. Accountability is another thing you aren't very good at.

Remember when you pretended to be a Democrat for a few weeks?

Yeah. Accountability.

"The Nunn court ruled that while the legislature could prohibit the concealed carry of weapons, it could not prohibit the open carry of weapons."

Curious how the Bruen standard feels about that. Because it's not legal for any state to outright deny concealed carry in 2026.

You think posting on this forum holds Republicans accountable.
#40 | Posted by sitzkrieg

I think individuals hold themselves accountable.
Or don't.
Your call, tootsie.

"Because Nunn is too late historically for the Bruen test."

How can it be too late, when Nunn is the first time the Second Amendment was tested?

"Its requirements are for regulations contemporaneous with the drafting of the Constitution or earlier, ie English Common Law."

See, I wouldn't really mind this, if those laws were matched to firearms contemporary to their period...

Wanna open carry a Musket? Okay. You'll get off one shot before the crowd beats you to death, and good luck concealing it.

Wanna open carry an AR-15? Not a sensible gun regulation.

I'm not sure what kind of work the word "regulation" is doing in that statement...

The Gun That Won The West didn't win because it's such an effective tool in the fields of bureaucracy and legislation.